[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MATH-1086?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13868365#comment-13868365
]
Phil Steitz commented on MATH-1086:
-----------------------------------
All good points, Thomas; though one could quibble with the first and third
bullets - i.e., you never know when something might be extended and that was in
fact the reason for the old "policy" to keep implementation methods non-static.
It is a weak argument in this case, though; as the impls are really trivial
and supposed to be definitive. Sorry I missed the "factory methods" reference
in the javadoc. That should be removed. I am fine changing the methods to
static in this case.
> 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)
