You are on page 1of 13


AP Statistics Solutions to Packet 14


Inference for Regression Inference about the Model Predictions and Conditions

HW #32 1, 2, 6, 7 14.1 AN EXTINCT BEAST, I Archaeopteryx is an extinct beast having feathers like a bird but teeth and a long bony tail like a reptile. Here are the lengths in centimeters of the femur (a leg bone) and the humerus (a bone in the upper arm) for the five fossil specimens that preserve both bones: Femur: Humerus: 38 41 56 63 59 70 64 72 74 84

The strong linear relationship between the lengths of the two bones helped persuade scientists that all five specimens belong to the same species. (a) Examine the data. Make a scatterplot with femur length as the explanatory variable. Use your calculator to obtain the correlation r and the equation of the least-squares regression line. Do you think the femur length will allow good prediction of humerus length?
The correlation is r = 0.994, and linear regression gives y = 3.660 + 1.1969 x The scatterplot below shows a strong, positive, linear relationship, which is confirmed by r.

(b) Explain in words what the slope of the true regression line says about Archaeopteryx. What is the estimate of from the data? What is your estimate of the intercept of the true regression line?
represents how much we can expect the humerus length to increase when femur length increases by 1 cm, b (the estimate of ) is 1.1969, and the estimate of is a = 3.660.

(c) Calculate the residuals for the five data points. Check that their sum is 0 (up to roundoff error.) Use the residuals to estimate the standard deviation in the regression model. You have now estimated all three parameters in the model.
The residuals are 0.8226, 0.3668, 3.0425, 0.9420, and 0.9110; the sum is 0.0001 (but carrying a different number of digits might change this). Squaring and summing the residuals gives 11.79, so that s = 11.79 / 3 = 1.982.

14.2 BACKPACKS Body weights and backpack weights were collected for eight students. Weight (lbs): Backpack weight (lbs): 120 26 187 30 109 26 103 24 131 29 165 35 158 31 116 28

These data were entered into a statistics package and least-squares regression of backpack weight on body weight was requested. Here are the results: Predictor Constant BodyWT s = 2.270 Coef 16.265 0.09080 Stdev 3.937 0.02831 R-sq = 63.2% t-ratio 4.13 3.21 P 0.006 0.018

R-sq(adj) = 57.0%

(a) What is the equation of the least-squares line? (Hint: Look for the column Coef. What is the intercept? What is the slope?
backpack weight = 16.265 + 0.0908(body weight). The intercept is 16.265 and the slope is 0.0908

(b) The model for regression inference has three parameters, which we call , , and . Can you determine the estimates for and from the computer output? What are they?
The estimate for is the intercept of the least-squares line, that is, 16.265. The estimate for is the slope of the least-squares line, that is, 0.0908.

(c) The computer output reports that s = 2.270. This is an estimate of the parameter . Use the formula for s to verify the computers value of s.
The estimate for is s



30.9049 = 2.2695 6

14.6 AN EXTINCT BEAST, II Refer to exercise 14.1. Below is part of the output from the S-PLUS statistical software when we regress the length y of the humerus on the length x of the femur. Coefficients: (Intercept) Femur Value -3.6596 1.1969 Std. Error 4.4590 0.0751 t value -0.8207 Pr(> |t|) 0.4719

(a) What is the equation of the least-squares regression line? y = 3.6596 + 1.1969 x (b) We left out the t statistic for testing H0: = 0 and its P-value. Use the output to find t. b 1.1969 t= = = 15.9374 SEb 0.0751

(c) How many degrees of freedom does t have? Use Table C to approximate the P-value of t against the one-sided alternative Ha: > 0.
df = 3; since t > 12.92, we know that p < 0.0005.

(d) Write a sentence to describe your conclusions about the slope of the true regression line.
There is very strong evidence that > 0, that is, that the line is useful for predicting the length of the humerus given the length of the femur.

(e) Determine a 99% confidence interval for the true slope of the regression line. (Show your calculation.) Interpret the interval.
For df = 3, the critical value for a 99% confidence interval is t* = 5.841. The interval is 1.1969 (5.841)(0.0751) or 1.1969 0.439, that is, 0.7579 to 1.6359. We are 99% confident that the true slope of the LSRL of the length of humerus on the length of femur is between 0.758 and 1.636.

14.7 JET SKIS, I Data for the number of jet skis in use and number of fatalities for the years 1987 to 2000 are given below. Year Number in use Accidents Fatalities 5 376 92,756 1987 20 650 126,881 1988 20 844 178,510 1989 28 1,162 241,376 1990 26 1,513 305,915 1991 34 1,650 372,283 1992 35 2,236 454,545 1993 56 3,002 600,000 1994 68 4,028 760,000 1995 55 4,010 900,000 1996 (a) Formulate null and alternative hypotheses about the slope of the true regression line. State a onesided alternative hypothesis.
H0: = 0 (there is no association between number of jet skis in use and number of fatalities). Ha: > 0 (there is a positive association between number of jet skis in use and number of fatalities).

(b) What conditions or assumptions are necessary in order to perform a linear regression test of significance? Are these reasonable assumptions in this situation?
y responses are independent not given, proceed with caution. True relationship is linear yes is constant yes y varies normally - yes

(c) Perform a linear regression t test. Report the t statistic, the degrees of freedom, and the P-value. Write your conclusion in plain language.
LinRegTTest (TI-84) reports that t = 7.26 with df = 8. The P-value is 0.000. With the earlier caveat, there is sufficient evidence to reject H0 and conclude that there is an association between year and number of fatalities. As the number of jet skis in use increases, the number of fatalities increases.

(d) Determine a 98% confidence interval for the true slope of the regression line. (Show your calculation.) Write your conclusion in plain language.
The confidence interval takes the form b t* SEb. With t* = 2.8214, and SEb = 0.00000913, the 98% confidence interval is approximately (0.00004024, 0.00009176). We are 98% confident that the true slope of the LSRL of fatalities on number of jet skis in use in thousands is between 0.04 and 0.093.

HW # 33 9 11, 13 15 14.9 DOES FAST DRIVING WASTE FUEL? The table below gives data on the fuel consumption of a small car at various speeds from 10 to 150 kilometers per hour. Is there evidence of straight-line dependence between speed and fuel use? Make a scatterplot and use it to explain the result of your test. Speed (km/h) 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 Fuel used (liters/100km) 21.00 13.00 10.00 8.00 7.00 5.90 6.30 6.95 Speed (km/h) 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 Fuel used (liters/100km) 7.57 8.27 9.03 9.87 10.79 11.77 12.83

Regression of fuel consumption on speed gives b = 0.01466, SEb = 0.02334, and t = 0.63. With df = 13, we see that p > 2(0.25) = 0.50 (software reports 0.541), so we have no evidence to suggest a straight-line relationship. While the relationship between these two variables is very strong, it is definitely not linear.

14.10 The table below presents data on the relationship between the speed of runners (x, in feet per second) and the number of steps y that they take in a second. Speed (ft/s): Steps per second: 15.86 3.05 16.88 3.12 17.50 3.17 18.62 3.25 19.97 3.36 21.06 3.46 22.11 3.55

Here is part of the Data Desk regression output for these data: R-squared = 99.8% s = 0.0091 with 7 2 = 5 degrees of freedom Variable Coefficient s.e. of coefficient Constant 1.76608 0.0307 Speed 0.080284 0.0016

t-ratio 57.6 49.7

Prob < 0.0001 < 0.0001

(a) How can you tell from this output, even without the scatterplot, that there is a very strong straightline relationship between running speed and steps per second?
r2 is very close to 1, which means that nearly all the variation in steps per second is accounted for by foot speed. Also, the P-value for is small.

(b) What parameter in the regression model gives the rate at which steps per second increase as running speed increases? Find and interpret a 99% confidence interval for this rate.
(the slope) is this rate; the estimate is listed as the coefficient of Speed, 0.080284. Using a t(5) distribution the confidence interval is 0.080284 (4.032)(0.0016) = 0.07383 to 0.08674. We are 99% confident that the true slope of the LSRL of steps per second on running speed is between 0.07 and 0.09

14.11 THE LEANING TOWER OF PISA The Leaning Tower of Pisa leans more as time passes. Here are measurements of the lean of the tower of the years 1975 to 1987. The lean is the distance between where a point on the tower would be if the tower were straight and where it actually is. The distances are tenths of a millimeter is excess of 2.9 meters. For example, the 1975 lean, which was 2.9642 meters, appears in the table as 642. We use only the last two digits of the year as our time variable. Year: Lean: 75 642 76 644 77 656 78 667 79 673 80 688 81 696 82 698 83 713 84 717 85 725 86 742 87 757

Here is part of the output from the Data Desk regression procedure with year as the explanatory variable and lean as the response variable: Variable Constant year Coefficient -61.1209 9.31868 s.e. of coefficient 25.13 0.3099 t-ratio -2.43 30.1 prob 0.0333 < 0.0001

(a) Plot the data. Briefly describe the shape, strength, and direction of the relationship. The tower is tilting at a steady rate.
The plot (below) shows a strong positive linear relationship.

(b) The main purpose of the study is to estimate how fast the tower is tilting. What parameter in the regression model gives the rate at which the tilt is increasing, in tenths of a millimeter per year?
(the slope) is this rate; the estimate is listed as the coefficient of year: 9.31868.

(c) We want a 95% confidence interval for this rate. How many degrees of freedom does t have? Find the critical value t* and the confidence interval. Interpret the interval.
df = 11; t* = 2.201; 9.31868 (2.201)(0.3099) = 8.6366 to 10.0008. We are 95% confident that the true slope of the LSRL of tilt on year is between 8.6 and 10.0

14.13 THE GENTLE MANATEE The relationship between the number of powerboats registered and the number of manatees killed each year was explored in Chapter 3. We will revisit the data below: Year Powerboat Manatees Year Powerboat Manatees registrations (1000) killed registrations (1000) killed 33 614 1986 13 447 1977 39 645 1987 21 460 1978 43 675 1988 24 481 1979 50 711 1989 16 498 1980 47 719 1990 24 513 1981 53 716 1991 20 512 1982 38 716 1992 15 526 1983 35 716 1993 34 559 1984 49 735 1994 33 585 1985 We conducted inference on the manatee data earlier, but was this prudent? Check the conditions, and report your interpretations.
The major difficulty is that the observations are not independent. The number of powerboat registrations for any year is related to the number of registrations for the previous year. The other conditions can be assumed to be satisfied. The true relationship is linear The standard deviation of the response about the true line is the sam everywhere The response varies normally about the true regression line.

14.14 PISA, PISA! In Exercise 4.11 we regressed the lean of the Leaning Tower of Pisa on year to estimate the rate at which the tower is tilting. Here are the residuals from that regression, in order by years across the rows: 4.220 -5.011 -3.099 0.670 -0.418 -4.648 1.264 -5.967 -2.055 1.714 3.626 7.396 2.308

Use the residuals to check the regression conditions, and describe your findings. Is the regression in Exercise 4.11 trustworthy?
The number of points is so small that it is hard to judge much from the stemplot. The scatterplot of residuals vs. year does not suggest any problems. The regression in Exercise 14.11 should be fairly reliable.

14.15 DO HEAVIER PEOPLE BURN MORE ENERGY? Metabolic rate, the rate at which the body consumes energy, is important in studies of weight gain, dieting, and exercise. Lean body mass is an important influence on metabolic rate. Men and women show a similar pattern, so we will ignore gender. Here are the data on mass (in kilograms) and metabolic rate (in calories): Mass: 62.0 Rate: 1792 Mass: 40.3 Rate: 1189 62.9 1666 33.1 913 36.1 995 51.9 1460 54.6 1425 42.4 1124 48.5 1396 34.5 1052 42.0 1418 51.1 1347 47.4 1362 41.2 1204 50.6 1502 51.9 1867 42.0 1256 46.9 1439 48.7 1614

Use your calculator or software to analyze these data. Make a scatterplot and find the least-squares line. Give a 90% confidence interval for the slope and explain clearly what your interval says about the relationship between lean body mass and metabolic rate. Find the residuals and examine them. Are the conditions for regression inference met? The scatterplot (below) shows a positive association. The regression line is y = 113.2 + 26.88 x
the linear relationship with body mass accounts for r2 = 74.8% of the variation in metabolic rate. Minitab output (on the next page) reports b = 26.879 and SEb = 3.786; with df = 17, the critical value is t* = 1.740, so the 90% confidence interval for is 26.879 (1.740)(3.786) = 20.29 to 33.47 cal/kg. For each additional kilogram of mass, metabolic rate increases by about 20 to 33 calories. The residuals are listed on the next page (in order, down the columns). A stemplot (on the next page) suggests that the distribution of residuals is right-skewed, and the largest residual may be an outlier. A scatterplot (on the next page) of the residuals against the explanatory variable gives some hint that the variation about the line is not constant (in violation of the regression assumptions). However, the three highest residuals account for most of that impression (as well as the skewness of the distribution), so these three individuals may need to be examined further.



HW #34

19, 23

14.19 BEAVERS AND BEETLES Ecologists sometimes find rather strange relationships in our environment. One study seems to show that beavers benefit beetles. The researchers laid out 23 circular plots, each four meters in diameter, in an area where beavers were cutting down cottonwood trees. In each plot, they measured the number of stumps from trees cut by beavers and the number of cluster of beetle larvae. Here are the data: Stumps: Beetle Larvae: Stumps: Beetle Larvae: 2 10 2 25 2 30 1 8 1 12 2 21 3 24 2 14 3 36 1 16 4 40 1 6 3 43 4 54 1 11 1 9 2 27 2 13 5 56 1 14 1 18 4 50 3 40

(a) Make a scatterplot that shows how the number of beaver-caused stumps influences the number of beetle larvae clusters. What does your plot show?

Stumps (the explanatory variable) should be on the horizontal axis; the plot shows a positive linear association.

(b) Here is the Minitab regression output for these data: Predictor Coef Stdev T Constant -1.286 2.853 -0.45 Stumps 11.894 1.136 10.47 s = 6.419 R-sq = 83.9%

P 0.657 0.000

Find the least-squares regression line and draw in on your plot. What percent of the observed variation in beetle larvae counts can be explained by straight-line dependence on beaver stump counts? The regression line is y = 1.286 + 11.849 x . Regression on stump counts explains 83.9% of
the variation in the number of beetle larvae.

(c) Is there strong evidence that beaver stumps help explain beetle larvae counts? Give appropriate statistical evidence to support your conclusion.
Our hypotheses are H0: = 0 versus Ha: 0, and the test statistic is t = 10.47 (df = 21). The output shows p = 0.000, so we know that p < 0.0005; we have strong evidence that beaver stump counts help explain beetle larvae counts.


14.23 WEEDS AMONG THE CORN Lambs quarter is a common weed that interferes with the growth of corn. An agriculture researcher planted corn at the same rate in 16 small plots of ground, then weeded the plots by hand to allow a fixed number of lambs quarter plants to grow in each meter of corn row. No other weeds were allowed to grow. Here are the yields of corn (bushels per acre) in each of the plots: Weeds per meter 0 0 0 0 Corn yield 166.7 172.2 165.0 176.9 Weeds per meter 1 1 1 1 Corn yield 166.2 157.3 166.7 161.1 Weeds per meter 3 3 3 3 Corn yield 158.6 176.4 153.1 156.0 Weeds per meter 9 9 9 9 Corn yield 162.8 142.4 162.8 162.4

Use your calculator or software to analyze these data. (a) Make a scatterplot and find the least-squares line. What percent of the observed variation in corn yield can be explained by a linear relationship between yield and weeds per meter? Scatterplot below. Regression gives y = 166.5 1.099 x ; the linear relationship explains about
r2 = 20.9% of the variation in yield.

(b) Is there good evidence that more weeds reduce corn yield?
The t statistic for testing H0: = 0 vs. Ha : < 0 is t = 1.92; with df = 14, the P-value is 0.0375 We have some evidence that weeds influence corn yields, but it is not strong enough to meet the usual standards of statistical significance.

(c) Explain from your findings in (a) and (b) why you expect predictions based on this regression to be quite imprecise. Predict the mean corn yield under these experimental conditions when there are 6 weeds per meter of row.
The small value of r2 and the lack of significance of the t test indicate that this regression has little predictive use. When x = 6, y = 159.9 bu/acre; the 95% confidence interval with t* = 2.145 and : SE =2.54 is 159.9 (2.145) (2.54). The width of this interval is another indication that the model has little practical use.