However, that is not why I wrote it. I use it to work a k-sample test. The resulting test is wretched, in that it has low power. However, I respectfully suggest that all the competing tests are more wretched. That is, the new test is nonparametric and conservative and small-sample and nonrandomized, and it handles ties and heteroskedasticity correctly: but each of the older tests fails to be or do one or more of these. The supposed power of the older tests is an illusion. Testing with one of those older tests is like walking in a swamp, or so I think.
Also I use confidence intervals of two population medians to build a confidence interval of the difference of two population medians. This too is wretched. I respectfully suggest that the competing intervals are more wretched.
In the following paragraphs are some examples showing use of the program. The user is respectfully invited to try out these examples or to use any others. The only thing to remember is: follow the grammatical rules of JavaScript. (This is because the “eval” method of JavaScript is used in picking up the data from the upper text area.) In particular, the user is respectfully reminded that integers beginning with a zero digit may be understood to be in base eight. To top.
Which browsers?
Any modern Web browser can do this page, just so its JavaScript is turned on. If yours seems to be turned off, please ask for help from your classmates, children, spouse, or teacher.
To top.
Examples
[ .05, [ 6,5,7,89,88,5,4,3,4,66,2,12,34,75,89,4 ] ]and then move to the upper text area, and then paste into that uppertext area, and them click with the mouse on the “Median Confidence” button. Then the lower text area will contain
4 <= population median <= 75
This means that all the numbers from 4 to 75 inclusive are in the interval. The confidence may be more than 95%, because the binomial distribution has a discrete domain. The confidence cannot be less than 95%. The numbers in the sample need not be nonnegative integers; any numbers legal in JavaScript will do. Ties are permitted. Actually, this 95% two-sided confidence interval is two simultaneous 97.5% one-sided confidence intervals, one for the left side and one for the right side.
[ .05, [ 6,5,7,89,88,5,-4,3,0.676,66,2,12,34,75,89,4 ], [ 132,432,564,6667,76.341,1234,556,700,9876 ], [ -12,-13,-5,4,77,876,56,47,1243,34,67,98 ] ]This time there are three answers, one for each sample:
2 <= population median <= 88
76.341 <= population median <= 9876
-12 <= population median <= 876
The reader will notice that the first sample is the same as before, but its confidence interval is a little wider, because of the Bonferroni correction.
[ .01, [ 6,5,7,89,88,5,-4,3,0.676,66,2,12,34,75,89,4 ], [ 132,432,564,6667,76.341,1234,556,700,9876 ], [ -12,-13,-5,4,77,876,56,47,1243,34,67,98 ] ]where only the .05 has been changed, to .01, but everything else is unchanged. Then we get for our answers
0.676 <= population median <= 89
-Infinity <= population median <= Infinity
-13 <= population median <= 1243
The reader sees that all three of the confidence intervals are wider than before. The interval in the middle is very much wider, all the way from minus infinity to plus infinity.
To top.
var x=[]; for(var j=0;j<10;j++)x[j]=j; x;The user is respectfully invited to use the “Run a JavaScript program” button on this. The answer will be
0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9To top.
at dot
smtw2gh gmail com
Harold Kaplan’s statistics.htm