HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
X-Envelope-to: stat-l@mcgill1.BITNET
X-VMS-To: IN%"stat-l@mcgill1"
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.stat-l
Date:         Thu, 19 Nov 1992 16:04:46 -0400
From:         PLOCH@UTKVX.BITNET
Subject:      Splus, loess

I would like to compute some information statistics based on a loess
analysis in Splus.  I would like to find the equivalent of the X'X
matrix for the model and would like to compute skewness and kurtosis
for the residuals.  Splus help file does not identify any of these
items.  I'd appreciate help.

Don
ploch@utkvx.utk.edu
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Via:      UK.AC.UKC; 16 NOV 92 10:20:29 GMT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.stat-l
Date:         Mon, 16 Nov 1992 10:20:38 GMT
From:         "M.F.Fuller" <mff@UKC.AC.UK>
Subject: Re: Normal probability plots

The Minitab reference manual gives a table of critical values for the
correlation between a set of observations and their corresponding normal
scores (Minitab uses an approximation for expected normal scores - see the
manual). The Release 8 manual provides critical values for r for standard
sizes of test for n up to 1000; earlier releases only go up to n = 75.

More details can be found in MUG (Minitab Users' Group) Newsletter 15 dated
August 1992. A hiccup in using the procedure is that Minitab typically prints
correlations to 3 decimal places, while using the test often makes it desirable
to have more significant figures. A work around is to store the r value as
a Minitab constant (i.e., scalar) and then print K.. to get more decimal places.

Mike Fuller
Canterbury Business School, University of Kent, Canterbury, Kent, CT2 7PE,
England. Phone +44 227 764000 x.7729; fax +44 227 761187; email mff@ukc.ac.uk
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: stat-l@MCGILL1.BITNET
X-VMS-To: IN%"stat-l@mcgill1.bitnet"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.stat-l
Date:         Thu, 19 Nov 1992 11:23:00 MST
From:         DAVE HUTH <DHUTH@UTAHCCA.BITNET>
Subject:      intro stat book with sas

can anyone recommend a good introductory stat book (through regression)
that is packed with SAS examples?

dave huth
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.stat-l
Date:         Thu, 19 Nov 1992 15:49:33 EST
From:         T120000 <T120@MUSIC.ULAVAL.CA>
Subject:      Anscombe's (?) regression examples.

I cannot find the copy of one article by Anscombre with
four very small datasets on the subject, but I think that
it was in Technometrics, 1960, 2, pp. 123-147
or in a paper with Tukey also in Technometrics, 1963, 5,
pp. 141-160.

Michel de Seve
Universite Laval
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.stat-l
Date:         Mon, 16 Nov 1992 12:08:18 CET
From:         Joop Hox <A716HOX@HASARA11.BITNET>
Subject:      factor analysis

About April Milliken's question:

I agree with Andy Taylor that this looks more like a MANOVA question.
There are some problems with MANOVA. It assumes equal covariance matrixes
over time points. Also, it gives you in fact a kind of factor analysis,
because it gives you that linear combination of dependent variables that
produces the largest separation between the groups. This linear combination
may or may not be interpretable in view of the substantive problem.
If you use factor analysis, you are in fact assuming that the factor structure
across time points is the same (this assumption is a bit less restrictive than
the equal covariance matrices in manova). There are Lisrel models for panel
data that would apply, but I think your canine sample is to small to use Lisrel
A reason to use factor (preferably component-) analysis in stead of manova
would be that the factors might be more interpretable than what manova gives
you. If you want to use factor analysis, I would recommend a procedure like
this:
1) if the dependent variables are reasonably normal, use manova or discriminant
 (in SPSS) to test for equality of coveriance matrixes across time points. If
 variables have non-normal distributions, don't bother because the Box test
 used for this is extremely sensitive to non-normality.
2) split your variables in group means (aggregate in spss) and individual
 deviations from the group means (groups defined by different time points).
3) the correlations of the individual deviation scores will reflect all that
 is similar within the groups; do a component analysis on these.
4) the correlations of the group means reflect variation between groups; do a
 component analysis on these too.
5) If the results from 4) look very different than the results from 3),
 the assumption of similar factor structures at the different time points
 is violated. This means trouble. Strew ash on your hair, go home and mourn.
6) If 4) looks reasonably similar to 3), use the results from the within
 groups analysis in 3). If you can interpret them (f.i., can you interpret
 some factor as canine well-being), derive a formula to compute factor scores,
 compute these at all different time poins in the same way (using original
 variables) and do univariate anovas on these (manove is not really needed
 because your factor scores will be nearly orthogonal).
7) Some statisticians may feel that this analysis is a bit messy. I agree it
 is, but it may give you more insights than doing a manova straightaway.
8) A useful reference is: K. Harnkvist (1978). In Journal of Educational
 Psychology, 70, 706-16. A more modern approach is an article by B.O. Muthen
 in Psychometrika, 1989, 54: 557-85. But Muthen uses a latent variable approach
 assuming large samples.

Hope this sparkles some discussion

Joop Hox
University of Amsterdam
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.stat-l
Date:         Tue, 17 Nov 1992 14:09:04 EST
From:         Walt Pirie <WLTPIRIE@VTVM1.BITNET>
Subject:      Transformations

No criticism intended, but I have never understood the concern about "natural s
cale or metric" when using transformations. If the transformation is (hopefully
) 1 to 1, why is that a concern? And why is it any less "natural" than using a
"standardization" transformation to the t-test scale?
Not that I like transformations, but for other reasons. Like what they do to er
ror structure and related assumptions.

|==================================|============================|
|  Walter R. Pirie                 |                            |
|  Department of Statistics        |                            |
|  Virginia Tech                   |                            |
|  Blacksburg, VA 24061-0439       |                            |
|                                  |                            |
|  Tel. 703-231-5441               |                            |
|  Bitnet WLTPIRIE@VTFVM1          |                            |
|  Telnet WLTPIRIE@VTVM1.CC.VT.EDU |                            |
|                                  |                            |
|  Fax  703-231-3863               |                            |
|==================================|============================|
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.stat-l
From: hietanen@lut.fi (Pentti Hietanen)
Subject: In process industry
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 16:58:16 GMT
Distribution: bit.net
Organization: Lappeenranta University of Technology, Finland

What to do with process industry?

My problem is how to deal values in process industry where only
one measurement is acquired by time. Values are almost normally
distributed, many of them a litte skewed. I have been trying to
find control charts for individual values, now we are planning
to use CUSUM, moving average, EWMA, moving range and x-charts.

I would be interested to hear if you have knowledge or experience
about situation above.

Pentti Hietanen, student of Lappeenranta University of Technology,
Finland Internet: hietanen%lut.fi
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-VMS-To: IN%"stat-L@VM1.MCGILL.CA"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.stat-l
Date:         Fri, 20 Nov 1992 08:29:00 PST
From:         Charles Chamberlin <CHAMBERLINC@AXE.HUMBOLDT.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Anscombe Data -- Thanks

Thanks to Russ Lenth, Richard Thompson, and Dennis Roberts for
helping me correct the transmission of the Anscombe data set.  The 10.84
value in Y1 was received as 0.84 here.  *THANKS AGAIN*
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Charles E. Chamberlin
Environmental Resources Engineering
Humboldt State University
Arcata, CA  95521
USA
(707) 826-4346
(707) 826-3616 (fax)
ChamberlinC@axe.humboldt.edu
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Return-Path: <ecooch@sas.upenn.edu>
Posted-Date: Wed, 18 Nov 92 11:24:37 EST
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL11-upenn1.8]
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.stat-l
Date:         Wed, 18 Nov 1992 11:24:37 EST
From:         Evan Cooch <ecooch@SAS.UPENN.EDU>
Subject:      more ChiWriter stuff...

Since my original posting concerning ChiWriter's pricing offer, I've had
enough private notes that I'll make a couple of bits of info "public".

1) The price is $99.95 US for faculty and students. You need to quote a
special offer code: BBXY011256 to get the price.

2) The offer is good until 10 December, 1992

3) their FAX number is 408-298-6157. Phone 408-298-0828.

4) the version is currently DOS only. Rumbles have it that a Unix version is
   in the works.

Having just tried to help someone format a multilevel nested equation in
WordPerfect (took a LONG time), then giving up, doing it in 2 minutes on
ChiWriter and coverting it to WordPerfect, I was reminded yet again why I
got ChiWriter in the first place!

Nope...still don't get any money out of this.




           _///_              +----------------------------+
           -. .-              |       Evan G. Cooch        |
           ( L )    \////     |   Department of Biology    |
         --(\=/)--  (   )     | University of Pennsylvania |
        /         \ /  /      | Philadelphia, Pennsylvania |
        I          V  /       |   Phone: (215) 898-7129    |
        I            /        |     FAX: (215) 898-8780    |
        I           /         | ECOOCH@MAIL.SAS.UPENN.EDU  |
                              +----------------------------+
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.stat-l
Date:         Wed, 18 Nov 1992 16:38:58 MEZ
From:         Suitbert Ertel <SERTEL@DGOGWDG1.BITNET>
Subject:      Clustered events

            Events occurring in clusters.

Are there tools available determining degrees of event
clustering across observational time periods?  Is inferential
statistical judgment possible?

To illustrate: 20 events are recorded within a period of 40
days. Maximum clustering would be given if the 20 events occurred on
the same day. The other (=non-cluster) extreme is occurrence of
20 events exactly every two days. Both extremes deviate from
random distribution, the first, clustering, is what I am
interested in in the first place.

Can you suggest, for this kind of data, a measure indicating
degree of clustering?  If possible, the indicator should be
independent of numbers of events, i.e. it should allow for
comparing, for a period of, say, 40 days, degree of clustering of
A-events (say, N=20) with degree of clustering of B-events (say,
N=60).

Even more useful would be an indicator which, at the same time,
were independent of the length of the observational period. That
is, an observational period of, say 40 days might require
comparison, regarding degree of event clustering, with an
observational period of 50 days. But I could renounce that
option for my present project.

The presence of clustering for a one-sample case and differences
among degrees of clustering for n>1 sample cases should be
subjected to inferential statistical procedures.

(At my disposal: STATISTICAL CALCULATOR by MOLE Software (Tony Dusoir)
 providing, among many others, routines regarding permutation
 and bootstrap functions. Programming (in C) possible.)

Suitbert Ertel
Institute of Psychology
Gosslerstrasse 14
3400 Goettingen
Germany
e-mail: sertel@dgogwdg1.bitnet
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.stat-l
Date:         Thu, 19 Nov 1992 16:49:24 EST
From:         Walter Davis <WDAVIS@UNCVM1.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: meaning of transformations

On Wed, 18 Nov 1992 13:47:51 PST Jerry Arnold said:
>Michael Granaas writes:
>
>The following is an excerpt from 'Introduction to Quantitative
>Genetics' chapter 17 by D. S. Falconer. I don't know if this exactly
>addresses your question, but I think it's relevant to the discussion.
>
>      It is tempting to suppose that each character has its 'natural'
>      scale, the scale on which the biological process expressed in the
>      character works. Thus, growth is a geometrical rather than an
>      arithmetical process, and a geometric scale would appear to be the
>      most 'natural'. For example, an increase of 1g in a mouse weighing
>      20g has not the same biological significance as an increase of 1g
>      in a mouse weighing 2g: but an increase of 10% has approximately
>      the same significance in both. For this reason a transformation to
>      logarithms would seem appropriate for measurements of weight.
>      This, however, is largely a subjective judgement, and some
>      objective criterion for the choice of a scale is needed. Different
>      criteria, however, are often inconsistent in the scale they
>      indicate and, moreover, the same criterion applied to the same
>      character may indicate different scales in different populations.
>      Therefore the idea that every character must have its 'natural'
>      and correct scale is largely illusory.
>
>He goes on to discuss three reasons for using a transformation of
>scale 1) make the distrib normal 2) make the variance independent of
>the mean and 3) reduce non-additive interactions.
>
>
>--
>
>Jerry Arnold                              Internet: jwa@ans.orst.edu
>Dept of Animal Sciences                   Voicenet: 503-737-5043
>Oregon State University
>Corvallis, OR 97331

hi all,

I agree that variables do not have natural or 'true' scales.  This
problem comes up frequently when dealing with latent variable models
when you introduce 'scaling' to students.  The students tend to
be quite uncomfortable at first about scaling the latent variable
to the units of one of its variables.

However, some scales (for some variables) have achieved a
level of social consensus (degrees, centimeters, percents, etc.).
Therefore, when interpreting results, it is much easier to explain
how a model works, what it means, etc. when you are able to stay
relatively close to the original units.

On the other hand, specifying the correct functional form is
vitally important.  I want to be clear that I am not recommending
that anyone estimate a poorly fitting model just because it's
'non-transformed'.  I am trying to suggest that transforming
variables can have tremendous costs in terms of substantive
interpretability.

hope this helps,

Walter Davis <WDAVIS@UNCVM1>
Department of Sociology
Institute for Research in Social Science
UNC - Chapel Hill
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.stat-l
Date:         Thu, 19 Nov 1992 16:56:33 AST
From:         Rolf Turner <rolf@MATH.UNB.CA>
Subject:      Apologies.

Sorry for cluttering up the list --- hadn't noticed that Jon Cryer
had sent the info to the list as well as to me.


Rolf Turner
Dep't. of Maths and Stats
U.N.B., Fredericton, N.B. Canada E3B 5A3
rolf@math.unb.ca

----------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                    |
|          Nice day, isn't it?                                       |
|                                                                    |
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.stat-l
Organization: University of Haifa - Mt. Carmel Haifa, Israel.
Date:         Tue, 17 Nov 1992 10:41:49 IST
Comments:     Warning -- original Sender: tag was NETNEWS@HAIFAUVM
From:         "B. Reiser" <RSST305@HAIFAUVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Testing for Variances

One approach for handling mean and dispersion models simultaneously is
  discussed by
Nelder&Lee(1991)Applied Stochastic Models and Data Analysis,7,107-120
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.stat-l
From: WRK0000 <WRK0@UNB.CA>
Subject: transformations
Organization: The University of New Brunswick
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 1992 16:05:33 GMT

Of course sometimes the transformed figures are accepted
without much question as as natural as the original, and
sometimes more natural.

   variable             context          transformation
   -------------        --------------   ---------------------
   pH                   chemistry        logarithm
   decibel              acoustics        logarithm
   standard deviation   statistics       square root of variance
   conductivity         electricity      reciprocal of resistance
   correlation          statistics       cosine
   slope                various          cosine
   probit               dosage-response  inverse normal


Bill Knight / University of New Brunswick / Canada

Newsgroups: bit.listserv.stat-l
From: steveg@eos.arc.nasa.gov (Steven Edward Gregorich)
Subject: LISREL 386 EXTENDER Installation Addendum
Organization: NASA Ames Res. Ctr, Calif.
Distribution: usa
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 1992 01:35:19 GMT

LISREL 386 Extender Installation Addendum

Oops, I forgot to mention that I have 8MB of physical RAM.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.stat-l
Date:         Sun, 22 Nov 1992 14:05:41 MST
From:         Gene Glass <ATGVG@ASUACAD.BITNET>
Subject:      Wanted: Ranks Test

    I can't believe it! I'm too old for this. I had a student gather a
 bit of data thinking that when the time came I would just pick up
 Siegel or some other hoary text and look up the proper significance
 test. Now I can't find any test that addresses the problem.

   A group of 5 men ranks four things; and a group of five women do also:
                  Thing1  Thing2  Thing3  Thing4
       Man 1 :      4        2      1       3
       Man 2 :      4        3      2       1
        .
        .
        .
     Woman 1 :      3        2      4       1
     Woman 2 :      3        4      1       2
        .
        .
      etc.

      Now, I'm not obsessive about being fooled by chance, but I would
  like to know whether the disparity in the rankings between the men and women
  is of suffucient size that it is unlikely to have arisen solely from the
  chance selection of these two samples from populations in which men and
  women rank the four things similarly (or identically or something).

     Can anyone help?

_______________________________________________________________________

GENE V GLASS                                    ATGVG AT ASUACAD.BITNET
COLLEGE OF EDUCATION                            ATGVG AT ASUACVAX.BITNET
ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY                        INTERNET ADDRESS:
Tempe, AZ 85287-2411                            ATGVG@ASUVM.INRE.ASU.EDU
602-965-2692  (303-499-2816 from June '92 until Dec. '92)
  (While on sabbatical until Dec. '92, I can be reached at
    GLASS@SPOT.COLORADO.EDU )
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Subject: (no subject given)
X400-Trace: US*UMASSMAIL*UMASS; arrival Thu,
            19 Nov 92 10:55:09 -0500 action Relayed
P1-Message-ID: US*UMASSMAIL*UMASS; 921119105140561-MTASATURN
UA-Content-ID: 921119105140561-
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.stat-l
Date:         Thu, 19 Nov 1992 10:55:09 -0500
From:         GREG.KLINE@SATURN.UCC.UMASS.EDU

DOES ANYONE HAVE ANY BENCHMARK INFORMATION COMPARING SAS RUNNING
ON A 486-PC AT 50 MGHERTZ VS. A NEW SUM SPARC-IPC MACHINE? IS
THERE MUCH DIFFERENCE IN SPEED? THANKS FOR ANY INFORMATION.

GREG
From: wvenable@attunga.stats.adelaide.edu.au (Bill Venables)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.stat-l
Subject: Re: Reported use of S
Date: 23 Nov 92 15:53:42
Organization: Department of Statistics, University of Adelaide
NNTP-Posting-Host: attunga.stats.adelaide.edu.au
In-reply-to: NIZARD Alain-F's message of Sun, 22 Nov 1992 13:50:22 -0500

>>>>> "Alain" == NIZARD Alain-F <NIZARD@FRBDX11.BITNET> writes:

Alain> Hi net workers,

Hello Alain,

Alain> Does [Is there] anybody out there [who] could report [on their]
Alain> experience using S in 
Alain>    - statistic production,

? I'm not sure what this one means...

Alain>    - education

Yes.  We use it almost exclusively at third and fourth year level here -
data analysis, regression and ANOVA, multivariate analysis, medical
statistics, survival analysis, nonparametrics and next year possibly time
series, risk theory, quality control, and several others.

It works very well indeed.  We have a Sun laboratory and use S-PLUS within
an X-windows system.  The students learn to use it much faster than do the
staff (!) and once they have got over the fascination of coloured pictures
and flashy dynamic graphics they actually learn something using it.

It is the standard tool our postgraduate students use, too, of course.

Alain>    - applied statistics

Likewise.  It is virtually my only statistical tool for a pretty full and
comprehensive consultanting practice, and likewise for most of my colleagues.
It doesn't exactly pamper to the "everyting by the mouse" brigade, but it's
not exactly lacking in sound statistical tools, either.  I recommend it.

Alain> Any information would be welcomed :-) !

I could be more specific if you your request was a little more sharply
focused.  What did you have in mind using it for?
--
___________________________________________________________________________
Bill Venables, Dept. of Statistics, | Email: venables@stats.adelaide.edu.au
Univ. of Adelaide, South Australia. | Tel: +61 8 228 5412  Fax: ...232 5670
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.stat-l
Date:         Mon, 23 Nov 1992 09:33:27 GMT
From:         Ronan M Conroy <RCONROY@IRLEARN.UCD.IE>
Subject:      Re: last one-and it doesn't have anything to do with star trek!
              20 Nov 1992 18:32:37 EST from <BOYDJ@QUCDN.QUEENSU.CA>

I thought the psychology one went

3 is prime, 5 is prime, 7 is prime, and, according to the
LISREL model I computed on the data, so are all
numbers with an "e" in them.


ronan
From: HALTEMAN@MAINE.MAINE.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.stat-l
Subject: Re: Normal probability plots
Date: 18 Nov 92 21:35:56 GMT
Organization: University of Maine System

With regard to using Pearson's Chi-Squared for testing normality,
there is an article in the _Anals of Math Stat_ (V25) by Chernoff
and Lehmann that shows if cell boundries defined by using maximum
likelihood estimators based on  ungrouped data (i.e our usual
xbar and s2) , the resulting statistic is not Chi-Squared, but
is stochastically bounded between chi-squares with (k-p-1) and
(k-1) degrees of freedom. (k is number of cells and p is number of
parameters estimated).

Although I don't know which test is "best", it seems to me the
usual Pearson is not the one.


Bill Halteman
Dept. of Mathematics
U. of Maine, Orono
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.stat-l