Question 1 Suppose that you want to test the claim that the mean salary of veterinarians is $91,350. You collect salary information from...

We are asked to test the claim of the mean salary being $91,350 (`mu = 91350 ` ) using a sample of 60 salaries with a mean of $90,350 (` bar(x)=90350 ` ) and a population standard deviation of $5000 (s=5000.) ** I will recalculate if this is a sample standard deviation at the end.**

(a) The sample mean is not the sought after population mean, but we do not reject the claim outright. We would not expect the sample mean to be exactly 91350; there is some variability expected. If we were to do another sample of 60 salaries it is unlikely that the mean of this new sample would be 90350.

However, we do expect the sample means to be "close" to the population mean. In fact an application of the central limit theorem tells us that as the sample size grows, the means of the samples will be forced closer to the true population mean.

We use hypothesis testing to determine if the sample mean is outside of the expected range of sample means assuming that the population mean is actually 91350. Hypothesis tests take into consideration the size of the sample and how confident we want to be on accepting/rejecting the claim.

(b) You may need to adapt this to your 6-step process:

`H_0:mu=91350 ` This is the null hypothesis and our claim.

`H_1:mu != 91350 ` This is the alternative hypothesis.

With `alpha=.1 ` we compute the critical value(s):

Since the alternative is two-tailed (we allow for the actual mean to be above or below 91350) we look for the z-value with area .95 to the left (or .05 to the right.) Here z=1.645 (Some texts will use 1.64 or 1.65.) ((This number can be acquired from a standard normal table or from technology.))

The critical values are `z=+- 1.645 `

We now compute the test value. We have `n=60,sigma=5000,bar(x)=90350, mu=91350 ` so the test value is `z=(90350-91350)/(5000/sqrt(60))~~-1.549`

Since the test value is within the noncritical region (-1.549>-1.645) we do not reject the null hypothesis.

There is insufficient evidence to reject the claim that the mean salary is $91,350.

**********************************************************

If this was the sample standard deviation we run a t-test: The sample is large enough that the critical values and test values are virtually the same with the same answer.

Is there a word/phrase for "unperformant"?

As a software engineer, I need to sometimes describe a piece of code as something that lacks performance or was not written with performance in mind. Example: This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. Based on my Google searches, this isn't a real word. What is the correct way to describe this? EDIT My usage of "performance" here is in regard to speed and efficiency. For example, the better the performance of code the faster the application runs. My question and example target the negative definition, which is in reference to preventing inefficient coding practices. Answer This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. In my opinion, reads more easily as: This coding style leads to unmaintainable and poorly performing code. The key to well-written documentation and reports lies in ease of understanding. Adding poorly understood words such as performant decreases that ease. In addressing the use of such a poorly ...

nouns - what do you call the person who passes the trophies to the prize giver/presenter?

The person who gives out the trophies to the winners are called award presenters. So what do u call the person who passes the trophies to the presenter? Thanks!

Is 'efficate' a word in English?

I routinely hear the word "efficate" being used. For example, "The most powerful way to efficate a change in the system is to participate." I do not find entries for this word in common English dictionaries, but I do not have an unabridged dictionary. I have checked the OED (I'm not sure if it is considered unabridged), and it has no entry for "efficate". It does have an entry for "efficiate", which is used in the same way. Wordnik has an entry for "efficate" with over 1800 hits, thus providing some evidence for the frequency of use. I personally like the word and find the meaning very clear and obvious when others use it. If it's not currently an "officially documented" word, perhaps its continued use will result in it being better documented.

Notes

Search This Blog