I checked with a nerdy geek and was told that it is a waste of
bandwidth to broadcast attachments to an entire mailing list.
Although not every attachment is a virus, NO ASCII text is.
Dr. Knodt's suggestion is entirely consistent with email etiquette.
- Forwarded message from Thomas Gatl
Dr. Knodt,
Perhaps you should make an appointment with some nerdy geek in the IR
department who can explain to you how viruses get promulgated. It is usually
through executables (.exe) files or microsoft macros. Otherwise you will
continue to be needlessly worried about non-existent threats.
I do all my repeated measures analyses with mixed modeling in SAS
these days, but I get called on to help people who use standard
repeated-measures analyses with other stats packages. So here's my
question, which I should know the answer to but I don't!
In a repeated-measures ANOVA, most stat
NOMINATIONS SOUGHT FOR 2001 BYAR YOUNG INVESTIGATOR AWARD AND
BIOMETRICS SECTION TRAVEL AWARDS
Have you (or, perhaps one of your students) submitted an abstract for
the 2001 Joint Statistical Meetings (JSM)? If so, please note that
the Biometrics Section is seeking nominations for the 2001 David
well, this is a tricky sort of ? if in fact, all REAL scores that
actually convert to a SAT value ... anything = to or > than 800 are listed
as ... 800 ... then, the ? really can't be ... what is the p value for
having 800 or more ... has to be what is the p value for 800
but, the questio
Everything you need is in what you wrote.
You do understand that "z" is the usual shorthand for "a standard score",
and that a standard score is the representation of a given raw score as
its deviation from the population mean in standard-deviation units?
The rest is merely a lookup in a tabl
SAT scores are approximately normal with mean 500 and a standard
devotion 100. Scores of 800 or higher are reported as 800, so a perfect
paper is not required to score 800 on the SAT. What percent of students
who take the SAT score 800?
The answer to this question shall be: SAT scores of 800+ cor
At 06:50 PM 4/2/01 +0100, Dr Graham D Smith wrote:
>Thinking about these issues has caused me to reassess the assumptions
>underpinning the use of the repeated measures t test (for differences).
>For a long time, I have thought that the homogeneity of variance
>assumption is meaningless for th
I would like to start a discussion on a family of procedures
that tend not to be emphasised in the literature. The procedures I have in mind
are based upon the ratio between two sets of scores
from the same sample.
To illustrate the discussion, I shall refer to the data from a
simple psych
On Sun, 01 Apr 2001 22:13:18 +0100, Colin Cooper
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> ==snip See Stephen Jay Gould's _The Mismeasure of Man_ for more
> > details; note that Thurstone adopted varimax rotations because their
> > results were consistent with *his* pet theories about intelligence.
> Hmm.
I'm coming in at a different slant from what I have seen posted
on this thread (in sci.stat.edu).
On Thu, 29 Mar 2001 20:30:59 +0200, "H.Goudriaan"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
...
> I have 2 questionnaires assessing (physical and emotional) health of
> heart patients. The 1st measures present s
Michael Scheltgen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Suppose X1, X2, X3, and X4 have a multivariate Normal Dist'n
> with mean vector u,
> and Covariance matrix, sigma.
>
> (a) Suppose it is known that X3 = x3 and X4 = x4. What is:
>
> 1)The expect
12 matches
Mail list logo
