ST 314

4.1 = .7 n = 3 a

HW #4

Solutions

= 5.8 [ z/2 / ] where = .05 /2 = .025 z.025 = 1.96 [5.8 1.96 (.7) / ] = [5.8 .79] = [5.01, 6.59] is a 95% C.I. for the true mean concentricity.

b z/2 / B 1.96 (.7) / .2 1.96 .7 / .2 n (1.96 .7 / .2)2 = 47.06 we must use n = 48 c We assume a sample of 3 measurements is large enough to use the Central Limit Theorem. The baseline data can provide a basis for generating either a stem-and-leaf display or a normal probability plot. These plots can provide insight as to an appropriate minimum sample size in order to assume the Central Limit Theorem. 4.2 =8 n=4 a = 101.4 [ z/2 / ] where = .01 /2 = .005 z.005 = 2.58 [101.4 2.58 (8) / ] = [101.4 10.32] = [91.08, 111.72] is a 99% C.I. for the true mean width.

b B z/2 / 2 2.58 (8) / 2.58 (8) / 2 n (2.58 (8) / 2)2 = 106.5 we must use n = 107 c We assume a sample of size 4 parts is large enough to use the Central Limit Theorem. The baseline data can provide a basis for generating either a stem-and-leaf display or a normal probability plot. These plots can provide insight as to an appropriate minimum sample size in order to assume the Central Limit Theorem.

4.4

= 250 a n = 16 = 6490 = .10 /2 = .05 Z/2 = Z.05 = 1.645 [ Z/2 / ] = [6490 1.645 (250 / )] = [6490 102.8125] So [6387.1875, 6592.8125] is a 90% C.I. for the true mean MOR.

b B z/2 / 100 1.645 (250 / ) (1.645) 250 / 100 n (1.645 2.5)2 = 16.9 we must use n = 17

c We assume a sample of size 16 pencil leads is large enough to use the Central Limit Theorem. The baseline data can provide a basis for generating either a stem-and-leaf diagram or a normal probability plot. These plots can provide insight as to whether a sample of 16 pencil leads is large enough to assume the Central Limit Theorem.

4.13 = 250 0 = 6500 n = 16 a = 6490 (1) H0: = 6500 Ha: 6500 = true mean MOR (2) Z = = = -.16 (3) = .10 /2 = .05 z.05 = 1.645 reject H0 if Z > 1.645 or z < -1.645 (4) -.16 > -1.645 and -.16 < 1.645, hence H0 is not rejected. (5) At = .10, there is insufficient evidence to conclude that the true mean MOR has changed from 6500. b p-value = 2Pr(Z < -.16) = 2(.4364) = .8728 c [6387.2, 6592.8] is a 90% confidence interval for Since 6500 is in the interval, we cannot reject the hypothesis that the true mean MOR is 6500. We are 90% confidence that the true mean MOR is between 6387.2 and 6592.8. We reach the same conclusion conducting the hypothesis test in part a.

4.21 a (1) H0: = 8 H a: 8

= true mean thickness of metal wires

(2) test-statistic: t = (3) = .05 /2 = .025 49 degrees of freedom Reject if |t| > 2.01 = t49,.025 (4) y = 398.8 y2 = 3182.8 n = 50 = y / n = 7.976 s2 = (y2 - (y)2 / n) / n-1 = (3182.8 - (398.8)2 / 50) / 49 = .04023 s = .2006 t = = -.85

(5) |-.85| < 2.01, so we cannot reject H0. At = .05, there is insufficient evidence to conclude
that the mean thickness of metal wires differs from 8 microns. b

[ t/2,n-1 s / ] = [7.976 2.01(.2006 / )] = [7.976 .057]

So [7.919, 8.033] is a 95% confidence interval for the one mean thickness of metal wires.

[ t/2, n-1 s ] = [7.976 2.01 (.2006 )] = [7.976 .407]

So [7.57, 8.38] is a 95% prediction interval for the thicknesses.

d A stem-and-leaf diagram and/or normal probability plot can be constructed. Stem 7.6 7.7 7.8 7.9 8.0 8.1 8.2 8.3 8.4 Leaves 0 00000 000000000 000000000 000000000000 00 000000 0000 00 No. Depth 1 1 5 6 9 15 9 24 12 2 14 6 12 4 6 2 2

To do the analysis, we assume that the distribution of metal wire thicknesses is roughly normal (i.e., single peaked, approximately mound-shaped, tails die rapidly). The stem-and-leaf diagram demonstrates that these assumptions, while suspicious, are not grossly violated. Normal probability plot is roughly a straight line, which looks good. e The chip-manufacturing process appears to be producing metal wires with a target thickness of 8 microns at the 95% confidence level.

4.24 a (1) H0: = 2.125% Ha: 2.125% (2) test-statistic: t =

= average moisture content

(3) = .01 /2 = .005 reject H0 if |t| > 2.779

n - 1 = 26 df

t26,.005 = 2.779

(4) y = 55.33 y2 = 113.8385 = 55.33/27 = 2.05 s2 = (114.8385 - (55.33)2 / 27) / 26 = .0174 s = .132 t = = -2.95

(5) Since |-2.95| > 2.779 we reject H0. At = .01, there is sufficient evidence to conclude the
true average moisture content differs from the target of 2.125% b

[ t/2,n-1 s / ] = [2.05 2.779 (.132 / )] = [2.05 .07]

So [1.98, 2.12] is a 99% confidence interval for the true mean moisture content.

[ t/2, n-1 s ] = [2.05 2.779 (.132 )] = [2.05 .37]

So [1.68, 2.42] is a 99% prediction interval for the moisture content.

d A stem-and-leaf diagram and/or normal probability plot of the 27 observations can be constructed.

Stem 1.7 1.8 1.9 2.0 2.1 2.2

Leaves 25 00488 002225669 024555778 29

No. Depth 2 2 0 2 5 7 9 9 11 2 2

We assume that the distribution of moisture contents of polyol is approximately normal (i.e., single peaked, roughly mound-shaped, tails die rapidly). Normal probability plot follows a straightline. e At the 99% confidence level evidence exists that the true moisture content has decreased from 2.125%. The confidence interval gives possible values between 1.98 and 2.12. This does indicate, however, that the shift has not been a large one.