Statistics, how do you translate Bin(n,p) to say N(,) etc

  • Thread starter Thread starter mathpariah
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Statistics
mathpariah
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
hey guys, some hopefully easy stat questions if you will

Im wondering about translating one statistical distribution to another, like going from:

Bin(n,p) to N(np,sqrt(npq)) where q=1-p

or that Po(au) is roughly equal to N(xu,sqrt(xu))

Im mostly sitting scratching my head on which method to use on each and every problem I am solving (Im studying for an exam in march). is there any chart or a really good and lightweight summary somewhere that can shed some light on this? like which method to use and how you can and why you need to translate them to another method, like in the examples above

Im also wondering when you need to use a two-sided interval, like youre going from a 95% to 97.5% by using 1-a/2 where a is the level

I could really use some help and would be grateful for any input

thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
mathpariah said:
hey guys, some hopefully easy stat questions if you will

Im wondering about translating one statistical distribution to another, like going from:

Bin(n,p) to N(np,sqrt(npq)) where q=1-p

or that Po(au) is roughly equal to N(xu,sqrt(xu))

Im mostly sitting scratching my head on which method to use on each and every problem I am solving (Im studying for an exam in march). is there any chart or a really good and lightweight summary somewhere that can shed some light on this? like which method to use and how you can and why you need to translate them to another method, like in the examples above

Im also wondering when you need to use a two-sided interval, like youre going from a 95% to 97.5% by using 1-a/2 where a is the level

I could really use some help and would be grateful for any input

thanks

To answer the first question, only if n*p and n*(1-p) are both 5 or greater can you use the normal distribution to approximate the binomial distribution. If these conditions are satisfied, then the binomial probability of exactly X successes in n trials approximately = the normal probability of getting a value between X-.5 and X+.5, with mean=np and sd=sqrt(npq). The binomial probability of the number of successes being less than or equal to X approximately = the normal probability of getting a value less than or equal to X+.5. The binomial probability of the number of successes being greater than or equal to X approximately = the normal probability of the number of successes being greater than or equal to X-.5.
 
moonman239 said:
To answer the first question, only if n*p and n*(1-p) are both 5 or greater can you use the normal distribution to approximate the binomial distribution. If these conditions are satisfied, then the binomial probability of exactly X successes in n trials approximately = the normal probability of getting a value between X-.5 and X+.5, with mean=np and sd=sqrt(npq). The binomial probability of the number of successes being less than or equal to X approximately = the normal probability of getting a value less than or equal to X+.5. The binomial probability of the number of successes being greater than or equal to X approximately = the normal probability of the number of successes being greater than or equal to X-.5.

thanks moonman.. I find the np and n(1-p)>5 limits curious but I can live with that.

Id be immensly appreciative if someone could look at my other questions too. does anyone know of a good summary website of basic distribution and WHEN to use which. like bin, po, N, chi square and t

thanks
 
Hi all, I've been a roulette player for more than 10 years (although I took time off here and there) and it's only now that I'm trying to understand the physics of the game. Basically my strategy in roulette is to divide the wheel roughly into two halves (let's call them A and B). My theory is that in roulette there will invariably be variance. In other words, if A comes up 5 times in a row, B will be due to come up soon. However I have been proven wrong many times, and I have seen some...
Thread 'Detail of Diagonalization Lemma'
The following is more or less taken from page 6 of C. Smorynski's "Self-Reference and Modal Logic". (Springer, 1985) (I couldn't get raised brackets to indicate codification (Gödel numbering), so I use a box. The overline is assigning a name. The detail I would like clarification on is in the second step in the last line, where we have an m-overlined, and we substitute the expression for m. Are we saying that the name of a coded term is the same as the coded term? Thanks in advance.
Back
Top