View Single Post
  #8  
Old June 30th, 2009, 06:18 PM
matheagle's Avatar
matheagle matheagle is offline
MHF Contributor
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 1,957
Country:
Thanks: 127
Thanked 813 Times in 730 Posts
matheagle is a splendid one to beholdmatheagle is a splendid one to beholdmatheagle is a splendid one to beholdmatheagle is a splendid one to beholdmatheagle is a splendid one to beholdmatheagle is a splendid one to beholdmatheagle is a splendid one to beholdmatheagle is a splendid one to behold
Send a message via Yahoo to matheagle
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by chrissy72 View Post
I do.
For means I have (for known variance) H_{0}: \mu=\mu_{0} H_{1}: \mu>\mu_{0}

z \ge z_{\alpha} OR \bar{x} \ge \mu_{0}+z_{\alpha}\sigma/\sqrt{n}

For unknown variance

t \ge t_{\alpha}(n-1) OR \bar{x} \ge \mu_{0}+t_{\alpha}(n-1)s/\sqrt{n}
The second one is exactly this...

\bar{x} \ge \mu_{0}+t_{\alpha}(n-1)s/\sqrt{n}

is the same as {\bar{x}-\mu_{0}\over s/\sqrt n}>t_{\alpha}(n-1)

WHERE the test stat is {\bar{x}-\mu_{0}\over s/\sqrt n}

and the rejection region is (t_{\alpha}(n-1), \infty)

and \mu_{0}=0 since under the null hypothesis you ARE assumng that \mu is 0.
Reply With Quote
The following users thank matheagle for this useful post:
Donate to MHF