185
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
mLine 281:
Line 281: − +
Talk:Significance of E. Coli Evolution Experiments (view source)
Revision as of 01:01, March 26, 2009
, 01:01, March 26, 2009→Unreferenced Claims
::::::----------
::::::----------
::::::Here are pointers to the Statistics 101 package <ref>http://www.statistics101.net/statistics101web_000003.htm</ref> and the actual programs run through the package by Blount ''et al.'' <ref>http://myxo.css.msu.edu/ecoli/citrate2008/MCprograms.html</ref>. The stats package is written in Java and should run under most major operating systems. A 10 million trial run of the second experiment took a bit of time and yielded a p-value of 0.00061. Ten separate, one-million trial runs produced an average p-value of 0.00061 (std.dev=0.00002, n=10). The numbers averaged about 0.0006 (std.dev=0.0004 n=10) 5K size trials.--[[User:Argon|Argon]] 20:52, 25 March 2009 (EDT)
::::::Here are pointers to the freely available Statistics 101 package <ref>http://www.statistics101.net/statistics101web_000003.htm</ref> and the actual programs run through the package by Blount ''et al.'' <ref>http://myxo.css.msu.edu/ecoli/citrate2008/MCprograms.html</ref>. The stats package is written in Java and should run under many operating systems. A 10 million trial run of the second experiment took a bit of time and yielded a p-value of 0.00061. Ten separate, one-million trial runs produced an average p-value of 0.00061 (std.dev=0.00002, n=10). Even with trial sizes of 5K, the numbers averaged about 0.0006 (std.dev=0.0004 n=10).--[[User:Argon|Argon]] 20:52, 25 March 2009 (EDT)
::::My intention is not to get caught up in a digression about Monte Carlo, though - I'd rather keep the focus on the fact that the main article should acknowledge that SJohnson is using chi-square in a way that violates accepted guidelines; this remains true whether Blount's analysis is valid or not.--[[User:ElyM|ElyM]] 12:13, 23 March 2009 (EDT)
::::My intention is not to get caught up in a digression about Monte Carlo, though - I'd rather keep the focus on the fact that the main article should acknowledge that SJohnson is using chi-square in a way that violates accepted guidelines; this remains true whether Blount's analysis is valid or not.--[[User:ElyM|ElyM]] 12:13, 23 March 2009 (EDT)