Difference between revisions of "Talk:Sighter Distribution"

From ShotStat
Jump to: navigation, search
Line 23: Line 23:
 
There is another fine point that should be explicitly stated. The sample of three shots uses ''n'' as sample size. But the <math>\sigma</math> is the population standard deviation, not the sample standard deviation ''s''.  
 
There is another fine point that should be explicitly stated. The sample of three shots uses ''n'' as sample size. But the <math>\sigma</math> is the population standard deviation, not the sample standard deviation ''s''.  
  
 +
----
 +
 +
Don't really like this
 +
 +
<math>f_{R_n}(r_n)</math>
 +
 +
seems it should just be
 +
 +
<math>f({R_n})</math>
 +
 +
which would require changing ''r'' to R in equation.
 +
----
 
[[User:Herb|Herb]] ([[User talk:Herb|talk]]) 15:14, 30 May 2015 (EDT)
 
[[User:Herb|Herb]] ([[User talk:Herb|talk]]) 15:14, 30 May 2015 (EDT)

Revision as of 15:35, 30 May 2015

I think there is some slop in the equations that needs fixing.

I think the second equation:

\(R(n) = \sqrt{\overline{x_i}^2 + \overline{y_i}^2}\)

should be:

\(R_n = \sqrt{\overline{X}^2 + \overline{Y}^2}\)


I think the third equation:

\(\bar X, \bar Y \sim N(0,\sigma^2/n)\)

should be:

\(\bar X, \bar Y \sim N(0,\frac{\sigma}{\sqrt{n}})\)


There is another fine point that should be explicitly stated. The sample of three shots uses n as sample size. But the \(\sigma\) is the population standard deviation, not the sample standard deviation s.


Don't really like this

\(f_{R_n}(r_n)\)

seems it should just be

\(f({R_n})\)

which would require changing r to R in equation.


Herb (talk) 15:14, 30 May 2015 (EDT)