Você está na página 1de 10

Exercise 1

Return Accuracy Return 0.05 0.05 0.004 0.003 0.006 0.06 0.009 0.998 0.997 0.995 0.996 0.99 0.997 0.9905 0.01 0.05 0.004 0.05 0.04 0.005 0.005 Accuracy 0.998 0.9907 0.999 0.9951 0.998 0.998 0.997

A) Plot the data on scatter plot and explore what kind of relationship exist between Return and Accuracy, Also build a regression model to predict the Return on the basis of Accuracy. Scatter Plot

return
0.08 0.06 0.04 0.02 0 0.988 0.99 0.992 0.994 0.996 0.998 1 return

According to the scatter diagram, there exist no relationship between return and accuracy. Regression Model
Coefficientsa Model Unstandardized Coefficients B (Constant) 1 Accuracy .438 2.171 .058 .202 .844 a. Dependent Variable: Return -.411 Std. Error 2.162 Standardized Coefficients Beta -.190 .852 t Sig.

Return = -0.411 + 0.438(Accuracy) If accuracy is increased by one unit, returns would increase by 0.438 units.

Exercise 2:
Downtime Productivity 35 29 15 14 0 32 18 16 16 10 32 8 7 94 97 98 98 99 89 92 95 95 97 94 98 99 Downtime 15
9

Productivity 97
97

8 14 0 10 9 8 6 5 4 3

98 98 99 97 98 98 99 99 98 98

A) Determine which is the x-variable is and which is the y-variable? Productivity is the dependent variable (y) and downtime is the independent variable(x). B) Using Minitab or Excel plot the residuals on one graph and interpret the results.

Residuals are clustering around the mean value and forming a bell shape curve, which represents the normal distribution. C) Are the residuals normally distributed? By applying Kolmogrov-Smirnov Z test on residuals, following results are obtained

Unstandardized Residual N Normal Parametersa,,b Mean Std. Deviation Most Differences Extreme Absolute Positive Negative Kolmogorov-Smirnov Z Asymp. Sig. (2-tailed) 25 .0000000 1.57255064 .161 .121 -.161 .803 .539

0.539 Significant value shows that residuals are normally distributed. D) Find the correlation coefficient between productivity and downtime and interpret the result.
Model Summaryb Model 1 R .766a R Square .586 Adjusted Square .568 R Std. Error of the Estimate 1.60637

a. Predictors: (Constant), downtime b. Dependent Variable: productivity

The correlation coefficient between productivity and downtime is - 0.766, which shows that there exist a strong negative correlation between productivity and downtime. (R = - 0.766) E) What proportion in the variations in productivity is explained by the changes in downtime? 58.6% of the variation in productivity is explained by the changes in downtime. (R2 = 0.586) F) What would have been the predicted productivity if the downtime were 45 minutes? The regression model between productivity and downtime is as following:

Coefficientsa Model Unstandardized Coefficients B (Constant) 1 downtime -.191 .033 -.766 -5.706 .000 a. Dependent Variable: productivity 99.305 Std. Error .538 Standardized Coefficients Beta 184.449 .000 t Sig.

Productivity = 99.305 0.191(Downtime) Putting downtime equal to 45 minutes in the above model, we get productivity equal to 90.71as (Productivity=99.305-(0.191*45) = 90.71)

Exercise 3:
Call Time 69 76 89 79 76 76 78 56 87 65 89 67 76 67 71

Overheat 15 17 20 18 17 17 18 14 20 17 23 19 17 15 16

Plastic 17 23 24 23 23 25 26 24 28 26 27 26 25 26 27

Ignorance 7 6 10 7 9 5 8 9 11 3 9 10 8 7 9

Carry out Multiple regression analysis in details.

Model Summary Std. Error of the Adjusted R Square Estimate .617 5.742

Model 1

R .836a

R Square .699

Model Accuracy 70 % of the variation in call time is explained by overheat, plastic and ignorance predictors Now Significance of Overall regression: H0: Model is insignificant. H1: Model is significant. = 0.05 ANOVA F-Test
ANOVAb Model 1 Regression Residual Total Sum of Squares 842.320 362.613 1204.933 df 3 11 14 Mean Square 280.773 32.965 F 8.517 Sig. .003a

a. Predictors: (Constant), Ignorance, Plastic, Overheat b. Dependent Variable: Call Time

From the above ANOVA table, we can see that p-value is less than our level of significance so we conclude that our regression model is significant at 5% level of significance. Significance of each Predictor H0: Overheat predictor is insignificant. H1: Overheat predictor is significant. H 0: Plastic predictor is insignificant. H1: Plastic predictor is significant. H0: Ignorance predictor is insignificant. H1: Ignorance predictor is significant. = 0.05 T Test for significance of predictors in regression.

Coefficients Standardized Coefficients Beta t 1.673 .874 -.180 .062 4.524 -.978 .346 Sig. .122 .001 .349 .736

Unstandardized Coefficients Model 1 (Constant) Overheat Plastic Ignorance B 26.253 3.533 -.633 .273 Std. Error 15.690 .781 .647 .789

a. Dependent Variable: Call Time

From the above table, we can see that p-value for overheat (0.001) is less than our level of significance so we reject the H0 & conclude at 5% level of significance that Overheat predictor is significant. As the p-value for Plastic (0.349) is greater than our level of significance so we accept the H0 & conclude at 5% level of significance that Plastic predictor is insignificant. As the p-value for Ignorance (0.736) is greater than our level of significance so we accept the H0 & conclude at 5% level of significance that Ignorance predictor is insignificant. Regression Equation Call Time = 26.253 + 3.533(overheat) 0.633(Plastic) + 0.273(Ignorance)

Exercise 4
Sales 1292 1234 1254 1983 1678 1876 2387 1234 1365 2354 1243 2345 TV 12 11 12 16 13 14 18 10 11 18 9 18 Radio Magazine Website Billboard 17 17 16 21 17 19 19 16 18 22 11 25 220 298 276 190 276 230 311 325 368 143 109 215 11987 8976 8720 19876 2342 1456 2135 1238 1243 2313 1215 163 60 58 20 729 305 198 511 1153 131 989 1111 1102

1342 1235 1243 1293

11 11 11 12

18 16 17 15

160 543 24 19

9808 706 973 169

1003 107 8 50

Run multiple linear regression and discuss the significance of each predictor.
Model Summary Std. Error of the Adjusted R Square Estimate .954 96.48655

Model 1

R .985a

R Square .970

97% of the variation in Sales is explained by TV, radio, magazine, website and billboard predictors. Significance of Overall regression H0: Model is insignificant. HA: Model is significant. = 0.05 ANOVA F Test

ANOVA Model Regression 1 Residual Total Sum of Squares 2975513.398 93096.540 3068609.937 df

Mean Square 5 10 15 595102.680 9309.654

F 63.923

Sig. .000
b

a. Dependent Variable: sales b. Predictors: (Constant), Billboard, Website, Magazine, Tv, Radio

From the above ANOVA table, we can see that p-value is less than our level of significance so we conclude that our regression model is significant at 5% level of significance. Significance of each Predictor H0: Radio predictor is insignificant. H1: Radio predictor is significant. H0: magazine predictor is insignificant. H1: magazine predictor is significant. H0: billboard predictor is insignificant.

H1: billboard predictor is significant. H0: website predictor is insignificant. H1: website predictor is significant. H0: TV predictor is insignificant. H1: TV predictor is significant. = 0.05
Coefficients Model Unstandardized Coefficients
a

Standardized Coefficients

Sig.

B (Constant) TV Radio 1 Magazine Website Billboard a. Dependent Variable: sales .102 -.007 .160 -264.781 148.883 -8.031

Std. Error 148.255 15.564 14.886 .196 .004 .057

Beta -1.786 .980 -.056 .029 -.088 .162 9.566 -.539 .520 -1.563 2.801 .104 .000 .601 .614 .149 .019

From the above table, we can see that p-value for TV (0.000) is less than our level of significance so we reject the H0 & conclude at 5% level of significance that TV predictor is significant. The p-value for radio (0.601) is greater than our level of significance so we accept the H0 & conclude at 5% level of significance that radio predictor is insignificant. As the p-value for Magazine (0.614) is greater than our level of significance so we accept the H0 & conclude at 5% level of significance that Magazine predictor is insignificant. As the p-value for website (0.149) is greater than our level of significance so we accept the H0 & conclude at 5% level of significance that website predictor is insignificant. The p-value for Bill boards (0.019) is less than our level of significance so we reject the H0 & conclude at 5% level of significance that Overheat predictor is significant. Regression Equation
Sales = -264.781+ 148.883 (TV) + .160 (Billboard) 0.007(website) + 0.102(magazine) 8.031 (radio)

Exercise 5
Rotation 2345 2365 2500 2467 2345 2347 2134 2368 2435 2654 2345 2346 2435 2436 2435 2543 2435 Weight Pressure Wind 69 70 74 73 69 69 63 70 72 78 69 69 72 72 72 75 72 98 100 114 113 127 129 101 124 113 112 104 116 127 113 116 112 113 75 77 88 87 98 99 78 95 87 86 80 89 98 87 89 86 87

a. Show that wind and Pressure are highly correlated.


Correlations Wind Wind Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) Pressure Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) .999** .000 1 Pressure .999** .000 1

Correlation coefficient of .999 shows that wind and pressure are strongly positively correlated.

b. Show that Rotation is highly dependent on the input factors.


Model Summary Std. Error of the Adjusted R Square Estimate .996 6.516

Model 1

R .999a

R Square .997

From above table R-square is 0.997 which means that 99.7% of the variation in Rotation variable is explained by weight, pressure and wind predictors which shows high dependency of Rotation on the input factors. C) Show that only Weight is significant in the equation. H0: weight predictor is insignificant. H1: weight predictor is significant. H0: pressure predictor is insignificant. H1: pressure predictor is significant. H0: wind predictor is insignificant. H1: wind predictor is significant. = 0.05 T Test for significance of predictors in regression.
Coefficients Standardized Coefficients Beta t .407 .994 .749 -.745 65.370 1.654 -1.645 Sig. .690 .000 .122 .124

Un-standardized Coefficients Model 1 (Constant) Weight Pressure Wind B 15.584 33.560 8.777 -11.324 Std. Error 38.273 .513 5.306 6.883

From the above table, p value of Weight predictor is less than 0.05 so we reject our H0 & conclude that at 5% significance level Weight predictor is significant. The p value of Pressure predictor is greater than 0.05 so we accept our H0 & conclude that at 5% significance level Pressure predictor is insignificant. The p value of Wind predictor is greater than 0.05 so we accept our H0 & conclude that at 5% significance level wind predictor is insignificant.