MHB What is the formula for determining the length of a confidence interval?

mathmari
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
4,984
Reaction score
7
Hey! :o

A research institute wants to establish a confidence interval for the quota of working people in a city. Let $\hat{p}_n $ be the estimated quota, based on a sample of size $n$. It is assumed that $n> 30$.
How can one determine the length of the confidence interval?

Generally this is equal to $L = 2 \cdot \frac{\sigma \cdot z}{\sqrt{n}}$, right?

Do you have to use the $\hat{p}_n$ in the formula in this case? But how?

(Wondering)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hey mathmari! (Wave)

The distribution of a proportion is a special case.
It has a z-distribution with an estimated standard deviation $\sigma_{\hat{p}_n} = \sqrt{\hat{p}_n(1-\hat{p}_n)}$.
And we should have $n \hat{p}_n > 10$ and $n (1 − \hat{p}_n) > 10$ to ensure it is sufficiently reliable.
 
I like Serena said:
The distribution of a proportion is a special case.
It has a z-distribution with an estimated standard deviation $\sigma_{\hat{p}_n} = \sqrt{\hat{p}_n(1-\hat{p}_n)}$.
And we should have $n \hat{p}_n > 10$ and $n (1 − \hat{p}_n) > 10$ to ensure it is sufficiently reliable.

Ah ok!

So, the length is equal to $$L = 2 \cdot \frac{\sigma_{\hat{p}_n} \cdot z}{\sqrt{n}}= 2 \cdot \frac{ \sqrt{\hat{p}_n(1-\hat{p}_n)} \cdot z}{\sqrt{n}}$$ where $z$ depends on the confidence level $1-\alpha$, right? (Wondering)
Suppose that $1-\alpha=0.95$. I want to determine $n$ so that the length of confidence interval is not bigger that $L_{\text{max}}=0.03$.

We have that $z =1.96$.

Then $$L_{\text{max}}=0.03 \Rightarrow 2 \cdot \frac{ \sqrt{\hat{p}_n(1-\hat{p}_n)} \cdot 1.96}{\sqrt{n}}\leq 0.03\Rightarrow \frac{ \sqrt{\hat{p}_n(1-\hat{p}_n)} }{\sqrt{n}}\leq \frac{3}{392} \Rightarrow \frac{ \hat{p}_n(1-\hat{p}_n) }{n}\leq \frac{9}{153664}\Rightarrow n\geq \frac{153664\hat{p}_n(1-\hat{p}_n)}{9}$$ right? We cannot continue from here, can we? (Wondering)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Indeed. (Nod)
Btw, do we have $L_{\text{max}}=0.04$ or $L_{\text{max}}=0.03$?
 
I like Serena said:
Indeed. (Nod)
Btw, do we have $L_{\text{max}}=0.04$ or $L_{\text{max}}=0.03$?

Oh, it is $L_{\text{max}}=0.03$. (Tmi)
 
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.

Similar threads

Back
Top