252y0772 11/26/07 (Page layout view!) ECO252 QBA2 THIRD EXAM November 29, 2007 Version 2 Name __Key_________________ Student number_______________ Class Day and hour____________ I. (8 points) Do all the following (2 points each unless noted otherwise). Make Diagrams! Show your work! All probabilities must be between zero and (positive) 1. x ~ N 27,14 75 27 46 27 z 1. P46 x 77 P P1.36 z 3.43 P0 z 3.57 P0 z 1.36 14 14 .4998 .4131 .0867 For z make a diagram. Draw a Normal curve with a mean at 0. Indicate the mean by a vertical line! Shade the area between 1.36 and 3.43. Because this is on one side of zero we must subtract the area between zero and 1.36 from the larger area between zero and 3.43. If you wish, make a completely separate diagram for x . Draw a Normal curve with a mean at 27. Indicate the mean by a vertical line! Shade the area between 46 and 77. This area is on one side of the mean (27) so we subtract to get our answer. 39 27 21 27 z 2. P21 x 39 P P0.43 z 0.86 P0.43 z 0 P0 z 0.86 14 14 .1664 .3051 .4715 For z make a diagram. Draw a Normal curve with a mean at 0. Indicate the mean by a vertical line! Shade the entire area between -0.43 and 0.86. Because this is on both sides of zero we must add the area between -0.43 and zero to the area between zero and 0.86. If you wish, make a completely separate diagram for x . Draw a Normal curve with a mean at 27. Indicate the mean by a vertical line! Shade the entire area between 21 and 39. This area is on both sides of the mean (27) so we add to get our answer. 0 27 3. Px 0 P z Pz 1.93 P1.93 z 0 Pz 0 .4732 .5 .9732 14 For z make a diagram. Draw a Normal curve with a mean at 0. Indicate the mean by a vertical line! Shade the entire area above -1.86. Because this is on both sides of zero we must add the area between -1.86 and zero to the area above zero. If you wish, make a completely separate diagram for x . Draw a Normal curve with a mean at 27. Indicate the mean by a vertical line! Shade the entire area above zero, remembering that zero is below the mean. This area is on both sides of the mean (27) so we add to get our answer. 4. x.08 (Do not try to use the t table to get this.) For z make a diagram. Draw a Normal curve with a mean at 0. z .08 is the value of z with 8% of the distribution above it. Since 100 – 8 = 92, it is also the 92nd percentile. Since 50% of the standardized Normal distribution is below zero, your diagram should show that the probability between z .08 and zero is 92% - 50% = 42% or P0 z z.08 .4200 . The closest we can come to this is P0 z 1.41 .4203 . (1.40 is also pretty close.) So z .08 1.41 (or something slightly smaller). To get from z .08 to x.08 , use the formula x z , which is the opposite of z x . x 27 1.4114 46 .74 . If you wish, make a completely separate diagram for x . Draw a Normal curve with a mean at 27. Show that 50% of the distribution is below the mean (27). If 8% of the distribution is above x.08 , it must be above the mean and have 42% of the distribution between it and the mean. Check: 46 .74 27 Px 46.74 P z Pz 1.41 Pz 0 P0 z 1.41 .5 .4207 .0793 .08 14 1 252y0772 11/26/07 (Page layout view!) II. (22+ points) Do all the following (2 points each unless noted otherwise). Do not answer a question ‘yes’ or ‘no’ without giving reasons. Show your work when appropriate. Use a 5% significance level except where indicated otherwise. Note that this is extremely long and that no one will do all the problems, so look them over! 1. Turn in your computer problems 2 and 3 marked as requested in the Take-home. (5 points, 2 point penalty for not doing.) 2. In an ordinary 1-way ANOVA, if the computed F statistic exceeds the value from the F table at the given significance level, we can a. Reject the null hypothesis because the difference between the means is not significant b.* Reject the null hypothesis because there is evidence of a significant difference between some of the means. c. Not reject the null hypothesis because the difference between the means is not significant. d. Not reject the null hypothesis because the difference between the means is significant. c. Not reject the null hypothesis because the difference between the variances is not significant. d. Not reject the null hypothesis because the difference between the variances is significant. e. None of the above. [7] 3. After an analysis if variance, you would use the Tukey-Kramer procedure or similar confidence intervals to check a. For Normality b. For equality of variances c. For independence of error terms d.* For pairwise differences in means e. For all of the above f. For none of the above 4. If an ordinary one-way ANOVA has 25 columns 17 rows and 17 25 425 , the degrees of freedom for the F test are a. 400 and 24 b. 408 and 16 c.* 24 and 400 d. 16 and 408 e. 400 and 424 f. 408 and 424 g. 424 and 400 h. 424 and 408 i. 16 and 24 j. None of the above. The correct answer is _______. Explanation: This is a one-way ANOVA. The total number of observations is n 425 and the number of columns is m 25 . This means there are 425-1 = 424 total degrees of freedom and that between the columns there are 25-1 = 24 degrees of freedom. This leaves 424 – 24 = 400 degrees of freedom for the error (within) term. Numbers are filled in below. Source SS DF MS F F SSB m 1 24 Within SSW n m 400 Total SST n 1 424 Between SSB m 1 SSW MSW nm MSB F MSB MSW 24, 400 1.40 F.01 2 252y0772 11/26/07 (Page layout view!) 5. Assuming that your answer to 4 is correct and that the significance level is 1%, the correct value of F from the table is __1.84___. (This may have to be approximate. If so, what did you use?) (1) [12] Note: I will check your answer against what you said in the previous question. The answer above is 24,400 . wrong if you did not say something close to F.01 Exhibit 1 A manager believes that the number of sales that an employee makes is related to the number of years worked and their score on an aptitude test. He runs the data below on Minitab and gets the following Employee 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Sales 110 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 Years 11 4 9 6 6 8 2 2 Score 70 100 90 40 80 50 40 10 MTB > regress c1 2 c2 c3 Regression Analysis: Sales versus Years, Score The regression equation is Sales = 28.2 + 3.10 Years + Predictor Coef SE Coef Constant 28.19 13.87 Years 3.103 1.984 Score 0.4698 0.2133 S = 15.1088 R-Sq = 72.8% Analysis of Variance Source DF SS Regression 2 3058.6 Residual Error 5 1141.4 Total 7 4200.0 Source Years Score DF 1 1 0.470 Score T P 2.03 0.098 1.56 0.179 2.20 0.079 R-Sq(adj) = 62.0% MS 1529.3 228.3 F 6.70 P 0.038 Seq SS 1951.4 1107.3 The sum of the sales column is 600 and the sum of the squared numbers in the sales column is not needed. The sum of the 'years' column is 48 and the sum of the squared numbers in the years column is 362. The sum of the score column is 480 and the sum of the squared numbers in the score column is 35200 If Sales is the dependent variable and years and score are the independent variables we have found that the sum of x1y is 3980 and the sum of x1 x2 is 3200. The sum of x2y has not been computed. 6. In the multiple regression, what coefficients are significant at the 10% significance level? (2) Solution: Only 0.4698, the coefficient of ‘score’ has a p-value below .10. 7. In the multiple regression, what coefficients are significant at the 5% significance level? (1) Solution: None [15] 8. Assuming that the coefficients in the multiple regression are correct, how many sales would we predict for someone with 9 years of experience and a score of 90? (1) Sales = 28.19 + 3.103 Years + 0.4698 Score = 28.19 + 3.103(9) + 0.4698(90) = 28.19 + 28.17 + 42.28 = 98.64 9. Using the information in the multiple regression printout, make your result in 8) into a rough prediction interval. (2) Solution: The outline says that an approximate prediction interval Y0 Yˆ0 t s e . Remember df n k 1 10 2 1 5 . In the printout s e S = 15.1088 MSE 228.3 . So Y0 98.64 t.5025 15.1088 98.64 2.57115.1088 98.64 38.84 3 252y0772 11/26/07 (Page layout view!) MTB > regress c1 2 c2 c3 Regression Analysis: Sales versus Years, Score The regression equation is Sales = 28.2 + 3.10 Years + 0.470 Score Predictor Coef SE Coef T P Constant 28.19 13.87 2.03 0.098 Years 3.103 1.984 1.56 0.179 Score 0.4698 0.2133 2.20 0.079 S = 15.1088 R-Sq = 72.8% R-Sq(adj) = 62.0% Exhibit 1 A manager believes that the number of sales that an employee makes is related to the number of years worked and their score on an aptitude test. He runs the data below on Minitab and gets the following Employee Sales Years Score 1 110 11 70 2 100 4 100 3 90 9 90 4 80 6 40 5 70 6 80 6 60 8 50 7 50 2 40 8 40 2 10 Analysis of Variance Source DF SS P Regression 2 3058.6 0.038 Residual Error 5 1141.4 Total 7 4200.0 MS F 1529.3 6.70 228.3 Source DF Seq SS Years 1 1951.4 Score 1 1107.3 The sum of the sales column is 600 and the sum of the squared numbers in the sales column is not needed. The sum of the 'years' column is 48 and the sum of the squared numbers in the years column is 362. The sum of the score column is 480 and the sum of the squared numbers in the score column is 35200 If Sales is the dependent variable and years and score are the independent variables we have found that the sum of x1y is 3980 and the sum of x1 x2 is 3200. The sum of x2y has not been computed. 10. Using the information in the printout, what is the value of R-squared for a regression of ‘sales’ against ‘years’ alone? (2) [20] Solution: Looking at the sequential Sum of squares the regression sum of squares is 1951.4 for ‘Years’ 1951 .4 .4646 alone. The total sum of squares is 4200.0, so we have R 2 4200 .0 11. Do a simple regression of ‘sales’ against ‘score’ alone. Before you do something ridiculous see 252blunders! xy that you will need for this regression. Show your work! (2) a) Compute the sum Don’t compute stuff that has already been done for you! Solution: The only column that you should have computed is in bold below. Row 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Sales 110 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 600 Years 11 4 9 6 6 8 2 2 48 Score 70 100 90 40 80 50 40 10 480 Ysq 12100 10000 8100 6400 4900 3600 2500 1600 49200 x1sq 121 16 81 36 36 64 4 4 362 x2sq 4900 10000 8100 1600 6400 2500 1600 100 35200 x1y 1210 400 810 480 420 480 100 80 3980 x2y 7700 10000 8100 3200 5600 3000 2000 400 40000 x1x2 770 400 810 240 480 400 80 20 3200 b) It says that you do not need to know the sum of squares in the sales column. You do Y 2 nY 2 . Without doing any computing, tell however need the spare part SS y what its value is. (1) Solution: The ANOVA in the computer output says that the total sum of squares is 4200.0. Of course, if you like to waste time SS y 2 Y 2 nY 2 600 49200 8 4200 . ( Y 75 ) 8 4 252y0772 11/26/07 (Page layout view!) MTB > regress c1 2 c2 c3 Regression Analysis: Sales versus Years, Score The regression equation is Sales = 28.2 + 3.10 Years + 0.470 Score Predictor Coef SE Coef T P Constant 28.19 13.87 2.03 0.098 Years 3.103 1.984 1.56 0.179 Score 0.4698 0.2133 2.20 0.079 S = 15.1088 R-Sq = 72.8% R-Sq(adj) = 62.0% Exhibit 1 A manager believes that the number of sales that an employee makes is related to the number of years worked and their score on an aptitude test. He runs the data below on Minitab and gets the following Employee Sales Years Score 1 110 11 70 2 100 4 100 3 90 9 90 4 80 6 40 5 70 6 80 6 60 8 50 7 50 2 40 8 40 2 10 Analysis of Variance Source DF SS P Regression 2 3058.6 0.038 Residual Error 5 1141.4 Total 7 4200.0 MS F 1529.3 6.70 228.3 Source DF Seq SS Years 1 1951.4 Score 1 1107.3 The sum of the sales column is 600 and the sum of the squared numbers in the sales column is not needed. The sum of the 'years' column is 48 and the sum of the squared numbers in the years column is 362. The sum of the score column is 480 and the sum of the squared numbers in the score column is 35200 If Sales is the dependent variable and years and score are the independent variables we have found that the sum of x1y is 3980 and the sum of x1 x2 is 3200. The sum of x2y has not been computed. c) Compute the coefficients of the equation Yˆ b0 b2 x to predict the value of ‘sales’ on the basis of ‘score.’ (4) [27] X 480 , Y 600 , (you computed ) XY 40000 , Solution: First copy n 8, X 2 35200 and Y Then compute means: X 2 is not needed. (It’s 49200.) X 480 60 n 8 The ‘Spare Parts’ are as follows: SS x You already found SS y Y 2 X Y 2 Y 600 75 . n 8 nX 35200 8602 6400 2 nY 2 4200 SST (Total Sum of Squares) . XY nXY 40000 860 75 4000 . S xy XY nXY 4000 0.625 and b So b1 SS x X 2 nX 2 6400 S xy 0 Y b1 X 75 0.625 60 37 .5 , which means Yˆ 37 .5 0.625 X or Y 37.5 0.625 X e d) Compute R 2 . (3) Solution: SSR b1 S xy 0.6254000 2500 . We can say R 2 R2 b1 S xy SSy SSR 2500 .59524 or SST 4200 S xy 2 0.625 4000 4000 2 .59524 .59524 or R 2 6400 4200 4200 SS x SS y 5 252y0772 11/26/07 (Page layout view!) Exhibit 1 A manager believes that the number of sales that an employee makes is related to the number of years worked and their score on an aptitude test. He runs the data below on Minitab and gets the following Employee Sales Years Score 1 110 11 70 2 100 4 100 3 90 9 90 4 80 6 40 5 70 6 80 6 60 8 50 7 50 2 40 8 40 2 10 MTB > regress c1 2 c2 c3 Regression Analysis: Sales versus Years, Score The regression equation is Sales = 28.2 + 3.10 Years + 0.470 Score Predictor Coef SE Coef T P Constant 28.19 13.87 2.03 0.098 Years 3.103 1.984 1.56 0.179 Score 0.4698 0.2133 2.20 0.079 S = 15.1088 R-Sq = 72.8% R-Sq(adj) = 62.0% Analysis of Variance Source DF SS P Regression 2 3058.6 0.038 Residual Error 5 1141.4 Total 7 4200.0 MS F 1529.3 6.70 228.3 Source DF Seq SS Years 1 1951.4 Score 1 1107.3 The sum of the sales column is 600 and the sum of the squared numbers in the sales column is not needed. The sum of the 'years' column is 48 and the sum of the squared numbers in the years column is 362. The sum of the score column is 480 and the sum of the squared numbers in the score column is 35200 If Sales is the dependent variable and years and score are the independent variables we have found that the sum of x1y is 3980 and the sum of x1 x2 is 3200. The sum of x2y has not been computed. e) Is the slope of the simple regression significant at the 5% level? Do not answer this question without appropriate calculations! (4) Solution: We can compute SSE SST SSR 4200 2500 1700 . Then SS y b1 S xy 4200 0.625 4000 SSE 1700 s e2 283 .3333 or s e2 283 .3333 n2 6 n2 6 1 283 .3333 s e 283 .3333 16 .83251 . So s b21 s e2 .04427 and 6400 SS x H 0 : 1 0 b 0 use t 1 and if the null s b .04427 0.2104 . The outline says to test 1 s b1 H 1 : 1 0 hypothesis is false in that case we say that 1 is significant. So our ‘do not reject’ zone is between 0.625 0 .2104 so that there is no doubt that the coefficient is significant. 6 t .025 2.447 if .05 . Our calculated t 2.971 is outside both these zones, f) Predict the number of sales an individual with a score of 90 will make and make your estimate into an appropriate 95% interval. (4) Solution: We found Yˆ 37.5 0.625X 37.5 0.62590 93.75 . The outline says that the 1 X X 2 prediction Interval is Y0 Yˆ0 t sY , where sY2 s e2 0 1 , X 60 , n SS x 2 1 90 60 1 s e2 283.3333 and SS x 6400 . So sY2 283 .3333 8 6400 283 .3333 0.12500 0.14063 1 283 .3333 1.26563 358 .5937 . We will use 6 2.447 . So Y0 Yˆ0 t sY 93.75 2.447 18.9366 sYˆ 358.5937 18.9366 and t .025 93 .75 46 .34 or 47.41 to 140.09. 6 252y0772 11/26/07 (Page layout view!) MTB > regress c1 2 c2 c3 Regression Analysis: Sales versus Years, Score The regression equation is Sales = 28.2 + 3.10 Years + 0.470 Score Predictor Coef SE Coef T P Constant 28.19 13.87 2.03 0.098 Years 3.103 1.984 1.56 0.179 Score 0.4698 0.2133 2.20 0.079 S = 15.1088 R-Sq = 72.8% R-Sq(adj) = 62.0% Exhibit 1 A manager believes that the number of sales that an employee makes is related to the number of years worked and their score on an aptitude test. He runs the data below on Minitab and gets the following Employee Sales Years Score 1 110 11 70 2 100 4 100 3 90 9 90 4 80 6 40 5 70 6 80 6 60 8 50 7 50 2 40 8 40 2 10 Analysis of Variance Source DF SS P Regression 2 3058.6 0.038 Residual Error 5 1141.4 Total 7 4200.0 MS F 1529.3 6.70 228.3 Source DF Seq SS Years 1 1951.4 Score 1 1107.3 The sum of the sales column is 600 and the sum of the squared numbers in the sales column is not needed. The sum of the 'years' column is 48 and the sum of the squared numbers in the years column is 362. The sum of the score column is 480 and the sum of the squared numbers in the score column is 35200 If Sales is the dependent variable and years and score are the independent variables we have found that the sum of x1y is 3980 and the sum of x1 x2 is 3200. The sum of x2y has not been computed. g) Do an analysis of variance using your SST, SSE and SSR for this equation or using 1, R 2 and 1 R 2 . What have you already done that makes this table redundant? If you don’t know what redundant means, ask! (3) [43] Solution: We actually have almost all this done. We have already found SS y 4200 SST , SSR b1 S xy 0.6254000 2500 and SSE SST SSR 4200 2500 1700 . So our ANOVA table will be as below. Source SS DF MS F Regression 1 2500 8.824 2500 F 1,6 5.99 F.05 Error 1700 6 283.3333 Total 4200 7 If we recall R 2 .59524 for this regression, we can rewrite the table as below. Source DF ‘MS’ F F R2 Regression 0.59524 1 0.59524 8.824 1,6 5.99 F.05 Error 0.40476 6 0.06746 Total 1.00000 7 Just for reassurance, here is the Minitab output. Regression Analysis: Sales versus Score The regression equation is Sales = 37.5 + 0.625 Score Predictor Coef SE Coef Constant 37.50 13.96 Score 0.6250 0.2104 S = 16.8325 R-Sq = 59.5% Analysis of Variance Source DF SS Regression 1 2500.0 Residual Error 6 1700.0 Total 7 4200.0 T P 2.69 0.036 2.97 0.025 R-Sq(adj) = 52.8% MS 2500.0 283.3 F 8.82 P 0.025 This is redundant because we have already shown that the coefficient of ‘Score’ is significant. Because there is only one independent variable, this shows the same thing. 7 252y0772 11/26/07 (Page layout view!) MTB > regress c1 2 c2 c3 Regression Analysis: Sales versus Years, Score The regression equation is Sales = 28.2 + 3.10 Years + 0.470 Score Predictor Coef SE Coef T P Constant 28.19 13.87 2.03 0.098 Years 3.103 1.984 1.56 0.179 Score 0.4698 0.2133 2.20 0.079 S = 15.1088 R-Sq = 72.8% R-Sq(adj) = 62.0% Analysis of Variance Source DF SS MS F P Regression 2 3058.6 1529.3 6.70 0.038 Residual Error 5 1141.4 228.3 Total 7 4200.0 Source DF Seq SS Years 1 1951.4 Score 1 1107.3 The sum of the sales column is 600 and the sum of the squared numbers in the sales column is not needed. The sum of the 'years' column is 48 and the sum of the squared numbers in the years column is 362. The sum of the score column is 480 and the sum of the squared numbers in the score column is 35200 If Sales is the dependent variable and years and score are the independent variables we have found that the sum of x1y is 3980 and the sum of x1 x2 is 3200. The sum of x2y has not been computed. Exhibit 1 A manager believes that the number of sales that an employee makes is related to the number of years worked and their score on an aptitude test. He runs the data below on Minitab and gets the following Employee Sales Years Score 1 110 11 70 2 100 4 100 3 90 9 90 4 80 6 40 5 70 6 80 6 60 8 50 7 50 2 40 8 40 2 10 h) Using the information on Regression Sums of squares or R 2 and 1 R 2 in the ANOVA that you just did and from the multiple regression, do an F test to see if adding ‘years’ to the regression of ‘sales’ against ‘score’ is worthwhile. Do not waste our time by repeating stuff that has already been done. (3) [46] Solution: In view of the original printout, we can rewrite out ANOVA tables above for the multiple regression. So our ANOVA table will be as below. Source SS DF MS F F Regression 3058.6 2 1529.3 6.70 Error 1141.4 5 226.3 Total 4200 7 2 If we recall R .7280 for this regression, we can rewrite the table as below. Source DF ‘MS’ F F R2 Regression 0.7280 2 0.3640 6.691 Error 0.2720 5 0.0544 Total 1.0000 7 For the regression against ‘Score’ alone, we had R 2 .59524 and SSR 2500 . So that if we itemize the regressions above, we get the tables below. Source SS DF MS F F Regression 3058.6 2 Score 2500.0 1 1,5 6.61 F.05 Years 558.6 1 558.6 2.468 Error 1141.4 5 226.3 Total 4200 7 If we use R 2 instead for this regression, we can rewrite the table as below. Source DF ‘MS’ F F R2 Regression 0.7280 2 Score 0.5952 1 1,5 6.61 F.05 Years 0.1328 1 0.1328 2.441 Error 0.2720 5 0.0544 Total 1.0000 7 In spite of the gigantic rounding error in the table using R 2 , the results are the same as in the ttest on the coefficient of ‘years’ in the second regression, the calculated F is below the table F so that adding ‘years’ does not significantly improve the results. 8 252y0772 11/26/07 (Page layout view!) Exhibit 2 (Groebner) A product is being produced on 3 different lines using 3 different layouts for the lines. A sample of 36 observations are taken on various days over a period of four weeks so that there are 12 observations for the daily output for each line evenly divided between the three possible layouts. Assume .05 . MTB > Twoway c5 c2 c3; SUBC> Means c2 c3. Two-way ANOVA: output 2 versus line, layout Source DF line 2 layout 2 Interaction _ Error __ Total 35 S = 20.14 R-Sq SS MS F P 133.4 66.7 0.16 0.849 29257.1 14628.5 36.06 0.000 2119.1 529.8 1.31 0.293 _______ _____ 42461.6 = 74.21% R-Sq(adj) = 66.56% Individual 95% CIs For Mean Based on Pooled StDev line Mean -----+---------+---------+---------+---1 131.833 (----------------*----------------) 2 127.750 (----------------*-----------------) 3 127.750 (----------------*-----------------) -----+---------+---------+---------+---119.0 126.0 133.0 140.0 Individual 95% CIs For Mean Based on Pooled StDev layout Mean ----+---------+---------+---------+----1 116.083 (---*----) 2 168.667 (---*----) 3 102.583 (----*----) ----+---------+---------+---------+----100 125 150 175 12. Fill in the missing degrees of freedom, the missing sum of squares and the missing mean square. (2) Solution: We can find the degrees of freedom by multiplying the degrees of freedom for the factors that interact. The error degrees of freedom are whatever is needed to make the column add up and the mean squares are found by dividing the sums of squares by degrees of freedom. The error sum of squares is whatever makes the SS column add up. The MS is SS divided by DF. The corrected table reads as below. Two-way ANOVA: output 2 versus line, layout Source DF line 2 layout 2 Interaction 4 Error 27 Total 35 S = 20.14 R-Sq SS MS F P 133.4 66.7 0.16 0.849 29257.1 14628.5 36.06 0.000 2119.1 529.8 1.31 0.293 10952.0 405.630 42461.6 = 74.21% R-Sq(adj) = 66.56% 13. Is there significant interaction between ‘line’ and ‘layout’? Don’t answer unless you can tell me what the evidence is. (2) 4, 27 2.73 if we like to work. It is larger than the computed F of 1.31. Or we Solution: We can look up F.05 can simply note that since the p-value of 0.293 is well above any significance level that we are likely to use, we cannot reject the null hypothesis that the interaction is insignificant. 14. Is the difference between layouts significant? Why?(1) 2, 27 3.35 if we like to work. It is smaller than the computed F of 36.06. Or Solution: We can look up F.05 we can simply note that since the p-value of zero is well below any significance level that we are likely to use, we can reject the null hypothesis that the difference between the line means is insignificant. 9 252y0772 11/26/07 (Page layout view!) 15. Do a confidence interval of your choice for the difference between layout 1 and layout 3. Tell what kind of interval you are using , what its characteristics are and whether it shows a significant difference. (4)[55] Solution: The outline gives us a choice. There are 3 rows, 3 columns and 4 observations per cell. R 3, C 3, P 4, x1.. 116 .083, x3.. 102 .583 and RC P 1 333 27 . The error (within) mean square is MSW 405 .630 . x1.. x3.. 116 .083 102 .583 13.500 . 2MSW PC 2405 .630 67 .6050 8.2222 12 i. A Single Confidence Interval If we desire a single interval we use the formula for a Bonferroni Confidence Interval below with 2MSW m 1 . For rows this would be 1 3 x1 x 3 t RC P 1 2 PC 27 8.2222 13.500 2.052 8.2222 13.500 16.872 13.500 t .025 ii. Scheffé Confidence Interval If we desire intervals that will simultaneously be valid for a given confidence level for all possible intervals between means, for row means, we use 2MSW 2, 27 8.2222 13 .500 2 F.05 1 2 x1 x 2 R 1FR 1, RC P 1 PC 13 .500 23.35 8.2222 13 .500 21 .283 iii. Bonferroni Confidence Interval If we use this for row means 1 2 x1 x 2 t RC P 1 2m 2MSW , but it is usually PC impractical. iv. Tukey Confidence Interval This is of similar meaning to the Scheffé. For row means, we use MSW 1 2 x1 x 2 qR , RC P 1 PC 3, 27 8.2222 13.500 3.518.2222 13.500 28.860 . I’m suspicious. The Tukey 13.500 q interval should be smaller than the Scheffé. Part of the Tukey table appears below. df 24 0.05 0.01 df 30 0.05 0.01 2 3 4 5 m 6 7 8 9 10 * 2.92 3.96 * * 3.53 4.55 * 3.90 4.91 * * 4.17 5.17 * 4.37 5.37 * * 4.54 5.54 * 4.68 5.69 * * 4.81 5.81 * 4.92 5.92 * 2.89 3.89 * * 3.49 4.45 * 3.85 4.80 * * 4.10 5.05 * 4.30 5.24 * * 4.46 5.40 * 4.60 5.54 * * 4.63 5.65 * 4.73 5.76 3, 24 3,30 3.53 and q.05 3.49 , so It looks to me as if q3,27 ought to be halfway between q.05 q3,27 3.51 . Note that, since all of these intervals include zero, none of these differences is significant. 10 252y0772 11/26/07 (Page layout view!) 16. (Groebner) An industrial firm analyses the amount of breakage (in dollar cost) that occurs using 3 different shipping methods and four products. There is a strong likelihood that the data does not come from the Normal distribution. The purpose of the test is to see if the four shipping methods differ in breakage and the analysis is blocked by product. Rail Plane Truck Product 1 7960 7853 8818 Product 2 8399 7764 9432 Product 3 9429 9196 9560 Product 4 6022 5821 5676 The most appropriate method for doing this test is: a) *The Friedman Test b) The Kruskal-Wallis Test c) One-way ANOVA d) Two-way ANOVA e) The sign test [57] f) Another test (Name it!) 17. Assume that your decision is correct in 16. What is your null hypothesis or hypotheses? Be specific! Are you talking about rows or columns or both? Are you comparing means, medians, proportions or variances? Solution: The null hypothesis is that the medians of the columns are equal. 18. OK. Let’s see you do the test. (4) [63] Now compute the Friedman statistic Rail Plane Truck Product 1 2 1 3 12 2 2 SR 3r c 1 F i Product 2 2 1 3 rc c 1 i Product 3 2 1 3 12 Product 4 3 2 1 92 52 10 2 344 Sum 9 5 10 4 34 rcc 1 434 1 SRi 24 and 9 + Check: 206 48 3.5 . 2 2 4 5 + 10 = 24. If you check Table 8 (excerpt below) for c 3 and r 4 , you find that the p-value is .273, so we can reject the null hypothesis of equal medians. c 3, r 4 p value F2 0.000 0.500 1.500 2.000 3.500 4.500 6.000 6.500 8.000 1.000 .931 .653 .431 .273 .125 .069 .042 .005 A Minitab verification follows. MTB > Friedman c15 c2 c3. Friedman Test: breakage 1 versus mode blocked by product S = 6.50 DF = 2 P = 0.039 Sum of mode N Est Median Ranks plane 4 8025.3 4.0 rail 4 8226.7 9.0 truck 4 8705.5 11.0 Grand median = 8319.2 11 252y0772 11/26/07 (Page layout view!) ECO252 QBA2 THIRD EXAM Nov 26-29, 2007 TAKE HOME SECTION Name: _________________________ Student Number: _________________________ Class days and time : _________________________ Please Note: Computer problems 2 and 3 should be turned in with the exam (2). In problem 2, the 2 way ANOVA table should be checked. The three F tests should be done with a 1% significance level and you should note whether there was (i) a significant difference between drivers, (ii) a significant difference between cars and (iii) significant interaction. In problem 3, you should show on your third graph where the regression line is. You should explain whether the coefficients are significant at the 1% level. Check what your text says about normal probability plots and analyze the plot you did. Explain the results of the t and F tests using a 5% significance level. (3) III Do the following. (22+ points) Note: Look at 252thngs (252thngs) on the syllabus supplement part of the website before you start (and before you take exams). Show your work! State H 0 and H 1 where appropriate. You have not done a hypothesis test unless you have stated your hypotheses, run the numbers and stated your conclusion. (Use a 95% confidence level unless another level is specified.) Answers without reasons or accompanying calculations usually are not acceptable. Neatness and clarity of explanation are expected. This must be turned in when you take the in-class exam. Note that from now on neatness means paper neatly trimmed on the left side if it has been torn, multiple pages stapled and paper written on only one side. Show your work! 1) The Lees, in their book on statistics for Finance majors, ask about the relationship of gasoline prices y in cents per gallon to crude oil prices x1 in dollars per barrel and present the data for the years 1975 1988. I have obtained most of the data for the years 1980 – 2007. It is presented below. Row 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Year 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 GasPrice 1.25 1.38 1.30 1.24 1.21 1.20 0.93 0.95 0.96 1.02 1.16 1.14 1.13 1.11 1.11 1.15 1.23 1.23 1.06 1.17 1.51 1.46 1.36 1.59 1.88 2.30 * 3.10 CrudePrice 26.07 35.24 31.87 26.99 28.63 26.25 14.55 17.90 14.67 17.97 22.22 19.06 18.43 16.41 15.59 17.23 20.71 19.04 12.52 17.51 28.26 22.95 24.10 28.53 36.98 50.23 * 90.00 Yr-1979 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 This data set also contains the year with 1979 subtracted from it x 2 . You may need to use this later. Ignore it in Problem 1. Note that the numbers for 2006 have not yet been published in my source, Statistical 12 252y0772 11/26/07 (Page layout view!) Abstract of the United States, and that the numbers for 2007 are my estimates for third quarter prices. These are unleaded prices, which the Lees did not use. You are supposed to use only the numbers for 1990 through 2006 and one other observation for your data. You will thus have n 17 observations. The other column is the value for the year 1980 a , where a is the second to last digit of your student number. If you are unsure of the data that you are using or if you want help with the sums that you need to do the regression go to 3takehome072a. Show your work – it is legitimate to check your results by running the problem on the computer. (In fact, I will give you 2 points extra credit for checking it and annotating the output for significance tests etc.) But I expect to see hand computations for every part of this problem. a. Compute the regression equation Y b0 b1 x to predict the price of gasoline on the basis of crude oil prices. (3) b. Compute R 2 . (2) c. Compute s e . (2) d. Compute s b1 and do a significance test on b1 (2) e. Compute a confidence interval for b0 . (2) f. You have a crude price for 2007. Using this, predict the gasoline price for 2007 and create a prediction interval for the price of gasoline for that year. Explain why a confidence interval for the price is inappropriate and check to see if my estimated price is in the interval. (3) g. Do an ANOVA for this regression. (3) f) Make a graph of the data. Show the trend line and the data points clearly. If you are not willing to do this neatly and accurately, don’t bother. (2) [19] 2) Now we can use the date to see if there is a trend line in addition to the effect of crude oil. a. Do a multiple regression of the price of gasoline against crude prices and the data variable, which has been massaged to make 1980 year 1. This involves a simultaneous equation solution. Attempting to recycle b1 from the previous page won’t work. (7) c. Compute the regression sum of squares and use it in an ANOVA F test to test the usefulness of this regression. (4) b. Compute R 2 and R 2 adjusted for degrees of freedom for both this and the previous problem. Compare the values of R 2 adjusted between this and the previous problem. Use an F test to compare R 2 here with the R 2 from the previous problem. The F test here is one to see if adding a new independent variable improves the regression. This can also be done by modifying the ANOVAs in b.(4) d. Use your regression to predict the price of gasoline in 2007. Is this closer to the estimated gasoline price? Do a confidence interval and a prediction interval. (3) [37] e. Again there is extra credit for checking your results on the computer. Use the pull-down menu or try Regress GasPrice on 2 CrudePrice Yr-1979 (2) 3) According to Russell Langley, three sopranos were discussing their recent performances. Fifi noted that she got 36 curtain calls at La Scala last week, but Adalina put her down with the fact that she got 39. Could one of the singers really say that she had more curtain calls than another or could the differences just be due to chance? Personalize the data below by adding the last digit of your student number to each number in the first row. Use a 10% significance level throughout this question. Row 1 2 3 4 Fifi 36 22 19 16 Adelina 39 14 20 18 Maria 21 32 28 22 a) State your hypothesis and use a method to compare means assuming that each column represents a random sample of curtain calls at La Scala. (4) 13 252y0772 11/26/07 (Page layout view!) b) Still assuming that these are random samples, use a method that compares medians instead. (3) c) Actually, these were not random samples. Though row 1 represents curtain calls at La Scala (Milan), row 2 was in Venice, row 3 in Naples and row 4 in Rome. Will this affect our results? Does this show anything about audiences on the four cities? Use an appropriate method to compare medians. (5) d) Do two different types of confidence intervals between Milan and the least enthusiastic opera house. Explain the difference between the intervals. (2) e) Assume that we want to compare medians instead. How does the fact that these data were collected at three opera houses affect the results? (3) f) Do you prefer the methods that compare medians or means? Don’t answer this unless you can demonstrate an informed opinion. (1) g) (Extra credit) Do a Levine test on these data and explain what it tests and shows.(3) h) (Extra credit)Check your work on the computer. This is pretty easy to do. Use the same format as in Computer Problem 2, but instead of car and driver numbers use the singers’ and cities’ names. You can use the stat and ANOVA pull-down menus for One-way ANOVA, two-way ANOVA and comparison of variances of the columns. You can use the stat and the non-parametrics pull-down menu for Friedman and Kruskal-Wallis. You also probably ought to test columns for Normality. Use the Statistics pull-down menu and basic statistics to find the normality tests. The Kolmogorov-Smirnov option is actually Lilliefors. The ANOVA menu can check for equality of variances. In light of these tests was ANOVA appropriate? You can get descriptions of unfamiliar tests by using the Help menu and the alphabetic command list or the Stat guide. (Up to 7) [58] You should note conclusions on the printout – tell what was tested and what your conclusions are using a 10% significance level. 14