A NEW publication: "Finnish Statistics for Dummies".


Anon. wrote: (18 mintes after RF's post):
Reef Fish wrote:
Anon. wrote (only 4 minutes after RF's post):
Reef Fish wrote:
Anon. wrote: (5 minutes after RF's post):
Reef Fish wrote:
<snip>

Yes, you're right. They're not. That's why the intercept still exists
even though it has a point estimate of zero.

Anon O'Hara forgot to mention -- ALWAYS, regardless of what
the data is -- that intercept will ALWAYS be zero.

That is a correct fact. But I can''t find no appropriate place to
put it other than in a new book "Finnish Statistics for Dummies"
since I had already a version "Portuguese Statistics for Dummies".

In Finnish Statistics, if you know there is something nonexistent
in a model (because its estimate will ALWAYS be ZERO no
matter what the data is), you can call that a "parameter" that is
known to be always zero.

Thus, if the TRUE model is Y = b X + e

You can parametrize it as

Y* = ao + a1 X + ... ap Xp + bX + e

even though you know a priori that a0, a1, ..., ap will ALL
be identically zero so that the estimated model will be
the same as
Y + 0 + 0 + ... 0 + b^X,

This result cannot be found even in the Portuguese Statistics
book. The more advanced topics will be how you can estimate
the standard errors of these KNOWN zeros, from data on X.

But that may have to wait till the next chapter.


If there is no intercept parameter to estimate, and you
decided to put a zero there doesn't mean that it has been
estimated.

Indeed...

but it will have a standard error about it, because
it's still being estimated.

... that is what I wrote.
--
Bob O'Hara


And thus Bob O'Hara has succeeded in inaugurating the
First Edition of "Finnish Statistics for Dummies" with the same
philosophy and practice as "Portuguese Statistics for Dummies"
whose existence was credited to Luis A. Afonso.

In ALL posts whose subjects contain

"Finnish Statistics" or "Finnish Statistics for Dummies"

The GENERAL purpose is to MINIMIZE the propogation of
statistical noise and pollution by recognization SUBJECTS to
be always identifiation by these characteristics.

the content MUST satisfy these criteria:

1. It contains Statistical NONSENSE or NOISE created by
Anon Bob O'Hara, the research associate in biology in the
Department of Math and Statistics in the University of
Helsinki, in Finland.

2. The content of the posts may or may not contain verbatim
reproduction of the NONSENSE or NOISE -- for the
purpose of pollution control, but the contents are
intended to be SATIRICAL on the misuse of Statistics.

-- Reef Fish Bob.

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Gun control and rape - The myths and the facts
    ... Why do you continue to ignore the possibility of ZERO ... > dealing with any number of victims or potential victims greater than zero. ... > Let's forget statistics for a second here. ... "Your" evidence? ...
    (talk.politics.guns)
  • Re: DO NOT BELIEVE IN WHAT Jack Tomsky say
    ... nothing will ever penetrate until he takes a class in Statistics 101. ... significance level, Type I risk, or alpha risk is the ... zero do not prove that the difference is zero. ...
    (sci.stat.math)
  • Re: DO NOT BELIEVE IN WHAT Jack Tomsky say
    ... nothing will ever penetrate until he takes a class in Statistics 101. ... significance level, Type I risk, or alpha risk is the ... zero do not prove that the difference is zero. ...
    (sci.stat.math)
  • Re: Pointless statistics
    ... archiving their posts so such statistics are even less useful than zero. ... I finally remembered to set Agent to "never purge anything". ...
    (rec.games.computer.ultima.dragons)
  • Re: Gun control and rape - The myths and the facts
    ... >> than zero, except for the few incidents where such women are armed. ... let me clarify your response to be sure I am not confuse. ... >> are willing to disarm them. ... >> uncaring and to make decisions based on statistics as to what others may ...
    (talk.politics.guns)