Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Application of Statistical Concepts in The Determination of Weight Variations in Samples
Application of Statistical Concepts in The Determination of Weight Variations in Samples
I.
ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS
concluded that, the higher the value of the confidence level, the wider the
confidence interval, and the lower the value of the confidence level, the
narrower the confidence interval. [4]
4. How do the statistics calculated from data set 1 differ from those obtained
from data set 2?
Data set 1 has a lower standard deviation and range compared to data set 2,
which can be accounted for by the lower number of weights accounted for
unlike data set 2. The range of the confidence interval, the difference
between the upper and lower confidence limits, of data set 1 (0.043) is higher
than data set 2 (0.042). Data set 1 was not able to properly represent the
values of data set 2, and most likely the whole population, considering that it
is a subset of data set 2. Therefore, it can be concluded that the average
weight obtained from the 10 pieces of 25-centavo coin samples of data set 2
is more accurate and reliable than the average weight obtained from the six
samples of data set 1.
II.
DATA
Weight, g
0.0002
3.6061
0.0002
3.5922
0.0002
3.6357
0.0002
3.5788
0.0002
3.5959
0.0002
3.5322
0.0002
3.6005
0.0002
3.6209
0.0002
10
3.6125
0.0002
DATA SET 1
3.5833
DATA SET 2
GRUBBS TEST
Data Set
Suspected Values
Gtab
Gexp
H: 3.6357
1.8024
1.8871
L: 3.5788
0.96941
1.8871
H: 3.6357
1.4174
2.2900
L: 3.5322
2.2592
2.2900
Conclusion
Retained or Accepted
95%
Retained or Accepted
95%
Retained or Accepted
95%
Retained or Accepted
95%
at
at
at
at
REPORTED VALUES
Data Set
RSD
RR
3.5987
0.02052
8
5.7043
0.0569
15.8
3.5958
0.02815
1
7.8286
0.1035
28.78
III.
3.5987 0.0215
= 3.57723.6202
3.5958 0.0201
= 3.5757
3.6159
CALCULATIONS
Data Set 1
3.6357
3.6061
3.5959
3.5922
3.5833
3.5788
CL
0.0002
0.0002
0.0002
0.0002
0.0002
0.0002
Data Set 2
3.6357
3.6209
3.6125
3.6061
3.6005
3.5959
3.5922
3.5833
3.5788
3.5322
0.0002
0.0002
0.0002
0.0002
0.0002
0.0002
0.0002
0.0002
0.0002
0.0002
2. Grubbs Test
gcalc=
X-Xs
s
(1)
gcalc=
Lowest:
3.5987-3.6357
0.037
0.020528 = 0.020528
gcalc=
= 1.802416212 1.8024
gtab = 1.8871
1.8042 < 1.8871
Retain/Accept at 95% Confidence Level
Confidence Level
Data Set 2
Highest:
gcalc=
3.5987-3.5788
0.0199
0.020528 = 0.020528
= 0.969407638 0.96941
0.96941 < 1.8871
Retain/Accept at 95%
Lowest:
3.5958-3.6357
0.0399
0.028151 = 0.028151
gcalc=
3.5958-3.5322
0.0636
0.028151 = 0.028151
= 1.417356399 1.4174
2.259244787 2.2592
gtab= 2.2900
1.4174 < 2.2900
2.2592 < 2.2900
Retain/Accept at 95% Confidence Level
Retain/Accept at 95%
Confidence Level
3. Statistics
a. Mean
n
X
Data Set 1
X
i=1
(2)
10
= 3.598666667 3.5987
b.
= 3.59581 3.5958
Standard Deviation
n
(X -X)
s=
Sample
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
Total
Sample
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Total
Xi
Xi - X
3.5833
-0.0154
3.6061
0.0074
3.5922
-0.0065
3.6357
0.037
3.5788
-0.0199
3.5959
-0.0028
Xi
Xi - X
3.5833
3.6061
3.5922
3.6357
3.5788
3.5959
3.5322
3.6005
3.6209
3.6125
-0.0125
0.0103
-0.0036
0.0399
-0.017
0.0001
-0.0636
0.0047
0.0251
0.0167
(Xi - X )2
0.000237
16
0.000054
76
0.000042
25
0.001369
0.000396
01
0.000007
84
0.002107
2
(Xi - X
02)
n-1
(3)
Data Set 1
s=
0.00210702
5
=
0.020528127
0.020528
Data Set 2
0.00015625
0.00010609
0.00001296
0.00159201
0.000289
0.00000001
0.00404496
0.00002209
0.00063001
0.00027889
0.00713227
Data Set 1
RSD=
i=1
s=
0.00713227
9
= 0.028150922
0.028151
RSD=
s
1000ppt
X
Data Set 2
0.020528
1000ppt
3.5987
RSD=
= 5.7042822102 5.7043ppt
7.8286ppt
0.028151
1000ppt
3.5958
= 7.828577785
d. Range
R = Xhighest Xlowest
Data Set 1
XHighest = 3.6357
XLowest = 3.5788
(5)
Data Set 2
XHighest = 3.6357
XLowest = 3.5322
(4)
R = 3.6357 3.5322 =
e. Relative Range
RR =
R
1000ppt
X
Data Set 1
RR =
(6)
Data Set 2
0.0569
1000ppt
3.5987
RR =
= 15.81126518 15.8ppt
28.78ppt
f.
0.1035
1000ppt
3.5958
= 28.78358084
Confidence Limits
ts
n
(7)
Data Set 1
Data Set 2
(2.57)(0.020528)
3.5987
6
3.5987
=
0.0215
(2.26)(0.028151)
10
3.5987
=
0.0201
3.5958
REFERENCES
[1] Grubbs, F.E., 1974. Procedures for Detecting Outlying Observations in Samples.
Maryland: Ballistic Research Laboratories. 10-13.
[2] Gilbert, T.R., et al., 2011. Chemistry: The Science in Context. New York: WW
Norton & Company, Inc. 31-32.
[3] Almeda, J.V., et al., 2010. Elementary Statistics. Quezon City: UP Diliman. 236239.
[4] Mode, E.B., Elements of Statistics. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc. 202-204.