Displaying 2 results from an estimated 2 matches for "mumax".
Did you mean:
umax
2001 Apr 05
1
PR#896
...NTIES.CI)/((n.x + n.y) * (n.x + n.y - 1))))
dz <- (dz - CORRECTION.CI)/SIGMA.CI
abs(dz - zq)
}
To examine the behivour I plotted the course of the wdiff for a lot of
d and three zq (0.05, 0.5, 0.95) and I let optimize to compute the
minimums. Then I plotted it.
mumin<-min(x)-max(y)
mumax<-max(x)-min(y)
lll<-seq(mumin,mumax,by=0.01)
wdl<-apply(cbind(lll),1,wdiff,zq=qnorm(0.05))
wdm<-apply(cbind(lll),1,wdiff,zq=qnorm(0.50))
wdu<-apply(cbind(lll),1,wdiff,zq=qnorm(0.95))
plot(lll,wdl,type="l")
lines(lll,wdm,lty=4)
lines(lll,wdu,lty=7)
ol<-optimize(wdiff...
2001 Apr 05
2
CI for wilcoxon test (PR#895)
...hat while the exact wilcoxon test
is applied on ranks of x (thus testing that mu = x – y is greater than 0), the
exact CI is computed based on differences y - x, hence finding a CI for mu = y –
x). The same applies, in my opinion, to approximative CI, where he optimization
interval is set as (mumin,mumax) with
mumin <- min(y) - max(x)
mumax <- max(y) - min(x)
I didn’t go through other aspects, although I believe that the continuity
correction should be checked if some changes are made, and also that some closer
look onto definitions of uci and lci in the exact CI computations should be made...