Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Top Top
Mileage speed Mileage speed
Car No. (km/ltr) (km/hr) Car No. (km/ltr) (km/hr) d
1 21.2 151.9 1 15.04 211.3 0
2 21.79 147.6 2 15.41 207 0
3 21.87 145.6 3 15.43 206.2 0 1
4 22.71 136.1 4 15.92 213.4 0
5 22.52 139.7 5 15.2 204.2 0
6 21.41 146.1 6 15.22 208.7 0 2
7 22.71 139.6 7 14.6 200 0
8 21.71 143 8 14.41 210.9 0
9 19.95 136.4 9 14.79 208.5 0
10 20.65 146.6 10 14.81 214.2 0
11 22.86 139.9 11 15.61 215.8 0 3
12 21.12 136.6 12 15.76 215.8 0
13 22.8 148.5 13 14.97 215.2 0
14 20.89 143.4 14 14.71 218.7 0
15 22.49 134.2 15 15.55 208 0
16 20.94 140.5 16 15.19 212.2 0
17 20.37 137.8 17 15.36 219.7 0
18 22.72 135.1 18 15.93 216.4 0 4
19 20.54 138.8 19 14.54 205.8 0
20 21.14 132 20 14.76 209 0
5
6
7
10
Rocinante 36
Hypothesis
Mileage Top Speed
Ho = 22km/liter Ho = 140 km/hr
Ha =/ 22km/liter Ha =/ 140km/hr
Type 1 Error If we assume Null hypothesis is TRUE claim and we reject null hypothesis, chances are that w
If we assume Null hypothesis is FALSE claim and we failed to reject null hypothesis we will ha
Type 2 Error as per specification.
Type 2 error is very expensive for company- failed to reject cars which are sold under specifi
Conclusion all vehicles from customers
If p-value < ⍺ → Reject the null hypothesis.
-value ≥ ⍺ → Fail to reject the null hypothesis.
sis as P value for all 4 hypothesis is higher than significancevalue of 0.05
de by chief engineer on specfication of both Rocnante 36 and Marengo 32
we reject null hypothesis, chances are that we reject cars which are as per specification.
we failed to reject null hypothesis we will have chances of selling car models which are not
ed to reject cars which are sold under specification would cost very high due to recalling of
Verification Using Data Package
Mileage (km/ltr) d
Mean 21.6195 0
Variance 0.859868 0
Observations 20 3
Hypothesized Mean Difference 22
df 19
t Stat -1.835075
P(T<=t) one-tail 0.0411
t Critical one-tail 1.729133
P(T<=t) two-tail 0.0822
t Critical two-tail 2.093024
Observations 20 3
Hypothesized Mean Difference 140
df 19
t Stat 0.803602
P(T<=t) one-tail 0.215783
t Critical one-tail 1.729133
P(T<=t) two-tail 0.431566
Top Top
Mileage speed Mileage speed
Car No. (km/ltr) (km/hr) Car No. (km/ltr) (km/hr) d
1 21.2 151.9 1 15.04 211.3 0
2 21.79 147.6 2 15.41 207 0
3 21.87 145.6 3 15.43 206.2 0
4 22.71 136.1 4 15.92 213.4 0
5 22.52 139.7 5 15.2 204.2 0
6 21.41 146.1 6 15.22 208.7 0
7 22.71 139.6 7 14.6 200 0
8 21.71 143 8 14.41 210.9 0
9 19.95 136.4 9 14.79 208.5 0
10 20.65 146.6 10 14.81 214.2 0
11 22.86 139.9 11 15.61 215.8 0
12 21.12 136.6 12 15.76 215.8 0
13 22.8 148.5 13 14.97 215.2 0
14 20.89 143.4 14 14.71 218.7 0
15 22.49 134.2 15 15.55 208 0
16 20.94 140.5 16 15.19 212.2 0
17 20.37 137.8 17 15.36 219.7 0
18 22.72 135.1 18 15.93 216.4 0
19 20.54 138.8 19 14.54 205.8 0
20 21.14 132 20 14.76 209 0
5
6
7
10
1
Type 1 Error If we assume Null hypothesis is TRUE claim and we reject null hypothesis, chances are that w
If we assume Null hypothesis is FALSE claim and we failed to reject null hypothesis we will ha
Type 2 Error as per specification.
Type 2 error is very expensive for company- failed to reject cars which are sold under specifi
Conclusion all vehicles from customers
Marengo 32
Hypothesis
Mileage Top Speed
Ho = 15km/liter Ho = 210 km/hr
Ha # 15km/liter Ha # 210 km/hr
we reject null hypothesis, chances are that we reject cars which are as per specification.
we failed to reject null hypothesis we will have chances of selling car models which are not
ed to reject cars which are sold under specification would cost very high due to recalling of
Verification using data pack
Mileage (km/ltr) d
Mean 15.1605 0
Variance 0.2105 0
Observations 20 3
Hypothesized Mean Difference 15
df 19
t Stat 1.564459
P(T<=t) one-tail 0.067106
t Critical one-tail 1.729133
P(T<=t) two-tail 0.134213
t Critical two-tail 2.093024
Variance 26.48474 0
Observations 20 3
Hypothesized Mean Difference 210
df 19
t Stat 0.912445
P(T<=t) one-tail 0.186484
t Critical one-tail 1.729133