If I get this value of SW test is variable resid(lr3) normal distributed?
Shapiro-Wilk normality test
data: sample(resid(lr3), 5000, replace = T)
W = 0.9953, p-value = 1.355e-11
--
View this message in context:
http://r.789695.n4.nabble.com/Shapiro-Wilk-normality-test-tp4648236.html
Sent
1. Is this homework?
2. This is not an R question. Post to a statistical list list
stats.stackexchange.com for such questions.
3. If this is not homework, I suggest you consult a local statistical
expert, as your statistics knowledge appears minimal.
4. No variable is **ever** normally
I agree with Bert about tests of normality. See:
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/7781798/seeing-if-data-is-normally-distributed-in-r
Kevin
On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 12:09 PM, Bert Gunter gunter.ber...@gene.com wrote:
1. Is this homework?
2. This is not an R question. Post to a statistical
my knowledge of statistical is not minimal ..
i was just a little bit confused because on wikipedia i read that the value
of SW test 0 w 1. When w is very little then you're supposed to refuse
null hypotesis. So in this case, considering the value of w i should accept
null hypotesis, but
Dear Kewin, this is just my issue. Take a look at this
http://r.789695.n4.nabble.com/file/n4648278/Rplot02.png
I have skewness = 0.16 and kurtosis = 3.3 ... This one seem to me normally
distribued but both Shapiro-Wilk and Jarque-Bera test make me refuse null
hypotesis of normality
--
View
Subject: Re: [R] shapiro wilk normality test
Hmm thanks,
But on the other hand it just says i cant reject normality,
which doesnt really mean it is normal. Wouldn´t be nice to
test for non- normality ? if i´d reject that a high level i
could be pretty sure it ´s normal... ??
thanks in advance
You may consider the nortest package.
http://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/nortest/index.html
Regards,
CH
On Sat, Jul 12, 2008 at 11:30 PM, Bunny, lautloscrew.com
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi everybody,
somehow i dont get the shapiro wilk test for normality. i just can´t find
what the H0
shapiro.wilk test is saying that your data are normal and it's correct!
Bye
Marta
- Messaggio originale -
Da: C.H. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
A: Bunny, lautloscrew.com [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: r-help@r-project.org
Inviato: Domenica 13 luglio 2008, 7:27:43
Oggetto: Re: [R] shapiro wilk normality test
You may
-project.org
Inviato: Domenica 13 luglio 2008, 7:27:43
Oggetto: Re: [R] shapiro wilk normality test
You may consider the nortest package.
http://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/nortest/index.html
Regards,
CH
On Sat, Jul 12, 2008 at 11:30 PM, Bunny, lautloscrew.com
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi everybody
On 13-Jul-08 13:29:13, Frank E Harrell Jr wrote:
[...]
A large P-value means nothing more than needing more data. No
conclusion is possible. Please read the classic paper Absence of
Evidence is not Evidence for Absence.
Is that ironic, Frank, or is there really a classic paper with
that
, 2008 10:56 AM
To: Frank E Harrell Jr
Cc: r-help@r-project.org
Subject: Re: [R] shapiro wilk normality test
On 13-Jul-08 13:29:13, Frank E Harrell Jr wrote:
[...]
A large P-value means nothing more than needing more data. No
conclusion is possible. Please read the classic paper Absence
G'day all,
On Sun, 13 Jul 2008 15:55:38 +0100 (BST)
(Ted Harding) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 13-Jul-08 13:29:13, Frank E Harrell Jr wrote:
[...]
A large P-value means nothing more than needing more data. No
conclusion is possible.
I would have thought that we need more data would
Many thanks to Berwin, and also to Charles Annis, for the
references. The're good!
Ted.
On 13-Jul-08 15:22:03, Berwin A Turlach wrote:
G'day all,
On Sun, 13 Jul 2008 15:55:38 +0100 (BST)
(Ted Harding) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 13-Jul-08 13:29:13, Frank E Harrell Jr wrote:
[...]
A
Frank E Harrell Jr [EMAIL PROTECTED] [Sun, Jul 13, 2008 at 08:07:37PM CEST]:
(Ted Harding) wrote:
On 13-Jul-08 13:29:13, Frank E Harrell Jr wrote:
[...]
A large P-value means nothing more than needing more data. No
conclusion is possible. Please read the classic paper Absence of
Ted Harding [EMAIL PROTECTED] [Sun, Jul 13, 2008 at 10:59:21PM CEST]:
On 13-Jul-08 19:53:47, Johannes Huesing wrote:
Frank E Harrell Jr [EMAIL PROTECTED] [Sun, Jul 13, 2008 at
08:07:37PM CEST]:
(Ted Harding) wrote:
On 13-Jul-08 13:29:13, Frank E Harrell Jr wrote:
[...]
A large P-value
See at end.
On 13-Jul-08 21:42:19, Johannes Huesing wrote:
Ted Harding [EMAIL PROTECTED] [Sun, Jul 13, 2008 at
10:59:21PM CEST]:
On 13-Jul-08 19:53:47, Johannes Huesing wrote:
Frank E Harrell Jr [EMAIL PROTECTED] [Sun, Jul 13, 2008 at
08:07:37PM CEST]:
(Ted Harding) wrote:
On 13-Jul-08
Hi everybody,
somehow i dont get the shapiro wilk test for normality. i just can´t
find what the H0 is .
i tried :
shapiro.test(rnorm(5000))
Shapiro-Wilk normality test
data: rnorm(5000)
W = 0.9997, p-value = 0.6205
If normality is the H0, the test says it´s probably not
At 11:30 AM 7/12/2008, Bunny, lautloscrew.com wrote:
Hi everybody,
somehow i dont get the shapiro wilk test for normality. i just can´t
find what the H0 is .
i tried :
shapiro.test(rnorm(5000))
Shapiro-Wilk normality test
data: rnorm(5000)
W = 0.9997, p-value = 0.6205
If
-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
] On
Behalf Of Bunny, lautloscrew.com
Sent: Saturday, July 12, 2008 11:30 AM
To: r-help@r-project.org
Subject: [R] shapiro wilk normality test
Hi everybody,
somehow i dont get the shapiro wilk test for normality. i just can´t
find what the H0
-
From: Bunny, lautloscrew.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, July 12, 2008 12:20 PM
To: Mark Leeds
Cc: r-help@r-project.org
Subject: Re: [R] shapiro wilk normality test
Hmm thanks,
But on the other hand it just says i cant reject normality, which
doesnt really mean it is normal
At 12:48 PM 7/12/2008, Bunny, lautloscrew.com wrote:
first of all thanks yall. it´s always good to get it from people that
know for sure.
my bad, i meant to say it´s compatible with normality. i just wanted
to know if it wouldnt be better to test for non-normality in order to
know for sure.
and
21 matches
Mail list logo
