Statistics: Totals not representative of individual sums

  • Thread starter Thread starter liveitout
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Statistics Sums
liveitout
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
Hi there,
This is going to be difficult for me to explain, so I will try my best. My statistics is kind of rusty...
I've been given census data to analyze and I'm having problems. The totals are all given by the government.

For a specific attribute I've been given rows of different areas, and columns pertaining to the attribute. For ex. Race is divided into visible minority (further broken down into 5 other descriptive minorities) and non-minority.
The first row contains the total population, and total number of non-minorities, and each race and then the non-minorities. This all works out fine.

However, for each row (or area) the SUM total population is off by +/- 10.
Non-minorities + Visible minorities do not equal the total, and are either above or below by 10.
I'm trying to get percentages for each area, but if the total isn't accurate...what exactly can I do statistically to make this valid?

ex) Visible Minority = VM, non-minority = NM, Race1 = n, Race2 = k, race3= l

VM = n + k + l
VM + NM = total population
But in this case VM + NM = +/- 10 the given total

If you need further examples please let me know, I've tried my best!

Thanks a lot.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I suggest you give a specific numerical example of the data layout. If the real data is complicated, you might link to an example of it if it is public data and online. Or you might make up a simplified example.
 
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