# sci.stat.math

**OT:**,*Rich Ulrich***evomusart 2013: deadline extension**,*EvoMUSART***nfl team jerseys shop**,*Sophie Yuan***How to construct a frequency based test without a sufficient statistic**,*Dave***News Software. Get TOP in the mass media and SE.**,*Philip***[no subject]**,*Unknown***Re: Comprehensive Test Banks and solution manuals at good prices**,*kelijkosciesza***aria giovanni stripping**,*Philip***Re: R?**,*dkw***South-Western Federal Taxation 2013 test bank solution manual**,*get-grade-a***evomusart 2013: Submission deadline of November 1st, 2012 is approaching**,*EvoMUSART***Solution Manual for Traffic and Highway Engineering by Garber and Hoel 4th Edition - is available for sale. buy now at affordable prices. Contact to buy this : bestsellers.testbanks(at)gmail.com.**,*esol42********,*www . qw12*- <Possible follow-ups>
*******,*www . qw12*

**Re: Reducing bias of a Bayesian point estimator**,*David Jones**Message not available***Re: Reducing bias of a Bayesian point estimator**,*David Jones**Message not available***Re: Reducing bias of a Bayesian point estimator**,*David Jones**Message not available***Re: Reducing bias of a Bayesian point estimator**,*David Jones**Message not available***Re: Reducing bias of a Bayesian point estimator**,*David Jones*

*Message not available***Re: Reducing bias of a Bayesian point estimator**,*Ray Koopman***Re: Reducing bias of a Bayesian point estimator**,*Herman Rubin**Message not available***Re: Reducing bias of a Bayesian point estimator**,*Ray Koopman*

**iPhone App To Help You Learn French Faster By Using Flashcards With Pictures**,*fp7vwiogcr***Sampling and probability generating functions - reference wanted**,*Stephen Montgomery-Smith***Re: partition data, compute separate regressions, combine results**,*Art Kendall***Re: partition data, compute separate regressions, combine results**,*Art Kendall*- <Possible follow-ups>
**Re: partition data, compute separate regressions, combine results**,*Dave***Re: partition data, compute separate regressions, combine results**,*Rich Ulrich***Re: partition data, compute separate regressions, combine results**,*Ray Koopman***Re: partition data, compute separate regressions, combine results**,*Art Kendall*

**Re: Jensen's inequality & convexity of "max" function**,*Dave*- <Possible follow-ups>
**Re: Jensen's inequality & convexity of "max" function**,*Stephen Montgomery-Smith***Re: Jensen's inequality & convexity of "max" function**,*illywhacker*

**SAS code for Bayesian likelihood function.**,*Dave***Simple code in C for Gaussion Mixture Models**,*Situs Aja***Re: Mathamatical thought on Voting System**,*Ray Koopman***Missing data: density estimation and regression**,*hernan***Re: Can the argument from means be tightened by t-testing means “across N, R” as well as “across S, C”?**,*Ray Koopman***Thanks! Also, please note I'm going to bite the bullet and "Fisher-Yates" the real data 20 times ....**,*djh***Minor typo in previous post (Astrings instead of Cstrings in one place)**,*djh***Re: Thanks! Also, please note I'm going to bite the bullet and "Fisher-Yates" the real data 20 times ....**,*Ray Koopman***Yes. please (more detail on the "build-up" of variances and df's)**,*djh***Re: Yes. please (more detail on the "build-up" of variances and df's)**,*Ray Koopman***1) my restatement of your explanation of the formula; 2) clarification of "random vs non-random"**,*djh***Re: 1) my restatement of your explanation of the formula; 2) clarification of "random vs non-random"**,*Ray Koopman***Ahh! "4" meant "point 4", not "4 of something" ...**,*djh***Could you check this one result before I run the 1728?**,*djh***Also, please note I used raw e's, not ln(e)'s ...**,*djh***Also: NOT length interval = 25. Length interval = 1 (lowest)**,*djh***Re: Also: NOT length interval = 25. Length interval = 1 (lowest)**,*Ray Koopman***Unfortunately, I think we now have an absolute rule-out, at least when trying to use mean of raw e ...**,*djh***Forgot to ask: is it worth "leveraging-up" even though no "base" p per length interval is < 0.23 ?**,*djh***Re: Forgot to ask: is it worth "leveraging-up" even though no "base" p per length interval is < 0.23 ?**,*Ray Koopman***Have taken logs; will now leverage; while I'm doing so, could you consider this possible design error?**,*djh***We MAY be on the right track; if so, how can I possibly thank/repay you?**,*djh***Technical follow-up question re “n choose 2” analysis of table in last post**,*djh***Please forgive the "rose-colored glasses" typo of 0.00013 in my last post; of course it's 0.0013**,*djh***Re: Please forgive the "rose-colored glasses" typo of 0.00013 in my last post; of course it's 0.0013**,*Ray Koopman***Re: Technical follow-up question re “n choose 2” analysis of table in last post**,*Ray Koopman***I have to ask you to clarify your response, and also specify how to "look at" the t numerator ...**,*djh***Here is the table of t-numerators, sorted in DECREASING order within fold ....**,*djh***Correct table of "t-numerators" (prior table was t's themselves); but 0.0013 result still holds.**,*djh***Here are the 10 values of the Ornstein-Fresco index used in our calculation of raw e**,*djh***Calculations in my last post were clearly wrong (re t-num diff's vs Ornstein-Fresco index spread)**,*djh***Re: Here are the 10 values of the Ornstein-Fresco index used in our calculation of raw e**,*Ray Koopman***Re: Here are the 10 values of the Ornstein-Fresco index used in our calculation of raw e**,*djh***Yes - but actually, all the t's should be changed to u's because the numbers are for RNA, not DNA**,*djh***Re: Yes - but actually, all the t's should be changed to u's because the numbers are for RNA, not DNA**,*Ray Koopman***Re: Yes - but actually, all the t's should be changed to u's because the numbers are for RNA, not DNA**,*djh***I looked at the Gibley Ahlquist passage - they're dealing with the O-F indices on the DNA side of the house ...**,*djh***1) PDF's of the O-F papers have been emailed; 2) spoke with Jacques, will speak further with him on Tue**,*djh***Re: 1) PDF's of the O-F papers have been emailed; 2) spoke with Jacques, will speak further with him on Tue**,*Ray Koopman***Correct p's and df's for Y, Z, Y-Z for 1:R1, 2:R2, 3:R3**,*djh***Finally - a result consistent with our earliest logistic regression alignability result using a predictor derived from eS of Re**,*djh***Re: Finally - a result consistent with our earliest logistic regression alignability result using a predictor derived from eS of Re**,*Ray Koopman***An attempt to appopriately organize and caption the three previous tables**,*djh***Relationship of eS to ln(e) (via IOTT and Linear Regression)**,*djh***Oops - sorry: one exception to the IOTT result for uH stated in previous post**,*djh***Re: An attempt to appopriately organize and caption the three previous tables**,*Ray Koopman***You really are too kind ... seriously ...**,*djh***Re: You really are too kind ... seriously ...**,*Ray Koopman***1)Thanks! ( I was taking varY and VarZ to the .05 power, not the .5 power !);**,*djh***Please consider this analysis of mean ln(e) sums and mean eS sums.**,*djh***Your basic plot algorithm MAY help inject a significant dose of empirical reality into the analysis**,*djh***Please consider these interaction p’s in re our strategy for prediction of structural alignability via logistic regression.**,*djh***Now that you’ve shown how to tell “where”, can you show how to tell “why”?**,*djh***Jacques' summary response re scaling of e**,*djh***Re: Jacques' summary response re scaling of e**,*Ray Koopman***Do you have any suggestions about how to "convert" the O-F index for our purposes?**,*djh***Re: Do you have any suggestions about how to "convert" the O-F index for our purposes?**,*Ray Koopman***Re: Do you have any suggestions about how to "convert" the O-F index for our purposes?**,*djh***Re: Do you have any suggestions about how to "convert" the O-F index for our purposes?**,*Ray Koopman***Believe it or not, I can now answer your questions re the O-F index clearly and concisely.**,*djh***Re: Believe it or not, I can now answer your questions re the O-F index clearly and concisely.**,*Ray Koopman***Whoops - sorry! I recapped my code from memory incorrectly.**,*djh***Re: Whoops - sorry! I recapped my code from memory incorrectly.**,*Ray Koopman***Have heard from JRF; he's OK with a composite OFI per dicodon (defined as a sum, not an average.)**,*djh***Re: Have heard from JRF; he's OK with a composite OFI per dicodon (defined as a sum, not an average.)**,*Ray Koopman***Re: Have heard from JRF; he's OK with a composite OFI per dicodon (defined as a sum, not an average.)**,*djh***Minor correction to last post regarding "e = S / 3"**,*djh***Re: Have heard from JRF; he's OK with a composite OFI per dicodon (defined as a sum, not an average.)**,*Ray Koopman**djh***You've probably realized by now that the dH for a single doublet ONLY has scientific meaning as a unit in an additive calculation.**,*djh**Ray Koopman***You’re correct: the dhbarcalc for the equation IS an AVERAGE, not a SUM.**,*djh***Am sending off-line a "csv" file with the Tm's and Kelvin Tm's for the 3721 "non-stop" dicodons**,*djh***Re: Am sending off-line a "csv" file with the Tm's and Kelvin Tm's for the 3721 "non-stop" dicodons**,*Ray Koopman***Interaction p’s using “new e”**,*djh***Re: Interaction p’s using “new e”**,*Ray Koopman***Re: Interaction p’s using “new e”**,*Ray Koopman***I figured the Bonferroni-correction was coming ...**,*djh***My naive opinion is that "new e" clarifies the situation considerably ...**,*djh***Correction of two obvious typos in Ru section of last posted table**,*djh***Re: My naive opinion is that "new e" clarifies the situation considerably ...**,*Ray Koopman***Re: My naive opinion is that "new e" clarifies the situation considerably ...**,*djh***Re: My naive opinion is that "new e" clarifies the situation considerably ...**,*Ray Koopman***Re: My naive opinion is that "new e" clarifies the situation considerably ...**,*djh***Is there a standard ranking function which takes into account |x-y| as well as x/y ?**,*djh***Re: Is there a standard ranking function which takes into account |x-y| as well as x/y ?**,*Ray Koopman***A postscript from Jacques ...**,*djh***If we had data for 20 folds instead of 6, could we argue from the new result herein ?**,*djh***Re: If we had data for 20 folds instead of 6, could we argue from the new result herein ?**,*Ray Koopman***Reply to your post of 10/9 at 3:54pm**,*djh***Re: Reply to your post of 10/9 at 3:54pm**,*Ray Koopman***Please check if I understand how to get (Y,varY, dfY) at uL**,*djh***Re: Please check if I understand how to get (Y,varY, dfY) at uL**,*Ray Koopman***Thanks(!) for the clarification – please just check me now on the very first step.**,*djh***Re: Thanks(!) for the clarification – please just check me now on the very first step.**,*Ray Koopman***Re: Thanks(!) for the clarification – please just check me now on the very first step.**,*Ray Koopman***Thanks again; now, please permit a question about applicability of the protocol to coefficients**,*djh***Re: Thanks again; now, please permit a question about applicability of the protocol to coefficients**,*Ray Koopman***Are these "good enough" to keep going: pY at uL~.95, pZ at uH~.33, p(Y-Z)~.23 ???**,*djh***Forgot to mention: as you expected, df(Y), df(Z), and df(Y-Z) were huge ...**,*djh***Re: Forgot to mention: as you expected, df(Y), df(Z), and df(Y-Z) were huge ...**,*Ray Koopman***I assume you're referring to the null hypothesis here, i.e. that the means are the same ...**,*djh***Re: Are these "good enough" to keep going: pY at uL~.95, pZ at uH~.33, p(Y-Z)~.23 ???**,*Ray Koopman***Re vars vs SE's ...**,*djh***Regarding the question of fold-generalizability, here's the question ...**,*djh***Re: Regarding the question of fold-generalizability, here's the question ...**,*Ray Koopman***S and new C subsets for dicodon set 1 (showing that expected u’s are now the same for S and C)**,*djh*

**Two follow-on POSSIBLE “$64K” questions (I’m HOPING you MAY agree that they are!)**,*djh*

**Re: Why multiply t by sample std dev?**,*Dave***Looking for black gay male 17 years old**,*Bull terrier*- <Possible follow-ups>
**Looking for black gay male 17 years old**,*Arturo Magidin*