[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MATH-1086?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13868306#comment-13868306
]
Thomas Neidhart commented on MATH-1086:
---------------------------------------
In general I am not against this practice, but in the case of the
BinomialConfidenceInterval I was really wondering if it is not better to make
them static:
* the class itself has no internal state
* it does not implement any interface
* is not supposed to be sub-classed
* javadoc mentions factory methods (which actually got me started)
For the various tests there is a TestUtils class, which means a user does not
have to create an instance of the respective test, but can directly use the
static methods there. For the BinomialConfidenceInterval one would have to
instantiate an object first, which is at least inconvenient imho.
> Incorrect results from BinomialConfidenceInterval#getWilsonScoreInterval
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: MATH-1086
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MATH-1086
> Project: Commons Math
> Issue Type: Bug
> Affects Versions: 3.3
> Reporter: Siarhei Khamenka
> Fix For: 3.3
>
>
> It looks like BinomialConfidenceInterval#getWilsonScoreInterval produces not
> accurate results for interval lower bound.
> E.g. for input (10,9,0.95) it returns 0.818 instead of 0.596;
> for input (10,10,0.95) it returns 0.856 instead of 0.722.
> Used also
> http://epitools.ausvet.com.au/content.php?page=CIProportion&SampleSize=10&Positive=9&Conf=0.95&Digits=3
> and http://www.measuringusability.com/wald.htm to verify it.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.1.5#6160)
