Why does Chi-square formula have two different ones?

  • Thread starter Thread starter EigenCake
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Formula
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the two different Chi-square formulas found in various sources. One formula is derived from the definition of the Chi-squared distribution, while the other applies it to observed versus expected frequencies. The first reference explains the distribution of a random variable formed from squared standard-normal variables. The second reference suggests using the formula (O-E)^2/E for goodness of fit tests to evaluate the null hypothesis. Ultimately, the second formula is recommended for practical applications in hypothesis testing.
EigenCake
Messages
12
Reaction score
0
One is:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chi-squared_distribution

where at the bottom of the page, chi-square = sum of something devided by variance.

However, here:
http://www.napce.org/documents/research-design-yount/23_chisq_4th.pdf

where the chi-square formula is that the sum of the same thing devided by expectation value.

Which formula is right then?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
The first reference is the definition of Chi-squared :- the distribution of a RV formed from the sum of squared standard-normal random variables.

The second reference is an application of the above distribution to the case of expect versus observed frequencies, where (O-E)/sqrt(E) is asymptotically standard-normal and hence (O-E)^2/E is asymptotically Chi-squared.
 
Thanks!

It seems that for goodness of fit I should use the second formula to either reject or accept the null hypothesis, rather than use the first formula.
 
I was reading documentation about the soundness and completeness of logic formal systems. Consider the following $$\vdash_S \phi$$ where ##S## is the proof-system making part the formal system and ##\phi## is a wff (well formed formula) of the formal language. Note the blank on left of the turnstile symbol ##\vdash_S##, as far as I can tell it actually represents the empty set. So what does it mean ? I guess it actually means ##\phi## is a theorem of the formal system, i.e. there is a...
Back
Top