EMA dataset I (PHX/WNL 8.1) [General Sta­tis­tics]

posted by Helmut Homepage – Vienna, Austria, 2020-08-20 03:05 (901 d 04:12 ago) – Posting: # 21892
Views: 2,287

Hi ElMaestro,

❝ ❝ A correlation >1 is funny.


❝ In a way you can compare it with the CoA of a reference standard which is labeled with purity = 101.2 %. It does not contain 101.2% - I guarantee it :-D - but that may stil be the most viable estimate.


That’s another cup of tea. I guarantee that it can contain exactly 101.2% indeed – regardless what the CoA says. ;-)

❝ It is all about how we estimate / measure it. We are not guaranteed to get the same model maximum likelihood if you keep the rho controlled between (exactly) -1 to (exactly) 1 with any iterative method regardless of your tolerance setting on the x- or y-scale.


Here you are right despite some weirdos laments.* The largest correlation in my 500 simulated data sets was for #168 with 7.285 (‼)…



Dif-tor heh smusma 🖖🏼 Довге життя Україна! [image]
Helmut Schütz
[image]

The quality of responses received is directly proportional to the quality of the question asked. 🚮
Science Quotes

Complete thread:

UA Flag
Activity
 Admin contact
22,481 posts in 4,710 threads, 1,603 registered users;
31 visitors (0 registered, 31 guests [including 10 identified bots]).
Forum time: 06:18 CET (Europe/Vienna)

The difference between a surrogate and a true endpoint
is like the difference between a cheque and cash.
You can get the cheque earlier but then,
of course, it might bounce.    Stephen Senn

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