S×F vari­­ance: Followup [General Sta­tis­tics]

posted by jag009  – NJ, 2015-02-06 18:13 (4153 d 10:14 ago) – Posting: # 14383
Views: 43,980

Hi Angus,

Something is wrong with your computation of H1

We agreed on MI=0.165897781, dfd=67, X2p=0.05,67=49.16227018

From your previous post:

❝ Note: my value for H1 (MI) is 0.11305 and uses CHi value of 49.16227018; it is smaller than your value since CHI (p=0.05) IS 49.16227018


From FDA's equation: H1=(n-s)*MI /X2alpha,n-s

How did you end up with H1=0.11305? I reversed the equation using your H1 value to solve for (n-s) and ended up with (n-s)=33.5.

Looks like your H1 equation is wrong (you used the H2 and H3 equations). FDA's H2 and H3 equations are the same except H2 uses MT and H3 uses MR

H= -0.5*(n-s)*M# / X2alpha,n-s, where # = T or R

If you use the correct H1 equation then H1=0.226091092, and the final HQ2D equals to my value of 0.073583

Complete thread:

UA Flag
Activity
 Admin contact
23,655 posts in 4,993 threads, 1,572 registered users;
158 visitors (0 registered, 158 guests [including 35 identified bots]).
Forum time: 05:27 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

Scientists cannot simply hang their subjectivities
up on a hook outside the laboratory door.    Ruth Bleier

The Bioequivalence and Bioavailability Forum is hosted by
BEBAC Ing. Helmut Schütz
HTML5