|
Hello Readers,
Last week Behrang Kushavand brought to my attention that the lower and
upper limits of symmetric 95% confidence ranges for variance estimates are
incorrect and gave the correct lower and upper limits. I checked Behrang's
calculations and informed him that his are correct and mine were
wrong. I have transmitted the revised file to our Webmaster who has already
posted it on ai-geostats.org under Documents. My vote of confidence to
Behrang and Gregoire!
Late last year the formula for the variance of a set of measured values
determined in samples with variable weights was also discussed on ai-geostats.
It is simple to prove that the denominator in this formula is no longer a
positive integer but becomes a positive irrational. In fact, a
posted Excel template (see Variances_variable_weights under Documents)
shows that positive irrationals converge on positive integers when variable
weights converge on constant weights. Does anyone disagree with the corollary of
converging weights? Please let me know why!
Thanks and regards,
Jan W Merks |
* By using the ai-geostats mailing list you agree to follow its rules ( see http://www.ai-geostats.org/help_ai-geostats.htm )
* To unsubscribe to ai-geostats, send the following in the subject or in the body (plain text format) of an email message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Signoff ai-geostats
