'Statistical Analysis of Colored Stones by Using Random Sampling\r'

'Statistical Analysis of morose Stones by using Random Sampling Naomi Malary science laboratory Report 1 Ecology Lab 312 L-1 October 12, 2009 entranceway Random Sampling, a method often employ by ecologist involves an unp exitictable component. In this method, every last(predicate) members of the existence have an equal chance of being selected as part of the sample. The results involving random sampling can be categorized as descriptive statistics and inferential statistics (Montague 2009). descriptive statistics includes simplified calculations of a given sample and snip this information into charts and graphs that are easy to contrast.\r\nTrying to tinge conclusions that extend beyond the immediate entropy exclusively describes inferential statistics. To document the results of sampling, qualitative and quantitative info is used. Quantitative data lack is measured and determine on a numerical scale, whereas Qualitative data approximates data but does not measure charac teristics, properties and and so on The purpose of this experiment was to use statistical psychoanalysis to evaluate random sampling of drear jewel pits (Montague 2009). magical spell conducting this experiment, we came up with a few null hypotheses.\r\nThe early null guesswork is that all the pits that have the very(prenominal) color weigh the selfsame(prenominal). The second null hypothesis is that thither are more aristocratical stones than red or colour stones. Therefore the Blue stones lead be picked the mosr. Our final null hypothesis is that the stones of the same color have the same length and that they allow not vary in size. Method Our police squad was given a box of one carbon and two red, blue, and yellow stones. Team members A and B took turns choosing stones via random sampling, team member E preserve the color of the chosen stone.\r\nTeam member C measured the weight of the stone with a scale, and team member D measured the length of the stone using a vernier capiler. Team members A and B placed the stones back into the box, mixed it, and we indeed repeated the procedure. Three sample tick offs were interpreted . The initiative institute I were the first 5 samples taken (n=5), set II consist of n=10, and set tether consist of n=30. Results There appeared to be a small difference between stone color and their average weight ( hedge1. and figures 1-3).\r\nUpon observation, you leave fix that the yellow stones were bigger than the blue stones, and the blue stones were larger then the red stones (Table2. and figure 2-3). It can withal be noted that the only sample set to have red stones selected was in set III ( build 3). additionally, figure7 shows that blue stones were picked in greater proportion than the yellow and red stones. Discussion I hypothesized that all stones that packet the same color weighs the same. accord to table 2, all the stones of the same color do not make do the same weight.\r\nThough the average s eemed relatively the same, there still was a difference in the weight. Therefore, I must reject my null hypothesis on account of this information. The second null hypothesis tell that there are more blue stones than yellow or red stones, therefore more blue stones will be picked than either other stone. According to figure 7, the blue stones accounted for 44%, the yellow stones 38%, and the red stones 18%. Therefore I will not be rejecting my hypothesis on the foundation garment that there were more blue stones present than any other color.\r\nThe final null hypothesis utter that the stones of the same color have the same length. Table 2 and figures 5-7, accounted for the fact that the yellow stones were usually the yearlong and the red stones the shortest. Based on this information, I will not be rejecting this null hypothesis. material body 1: chart shows the average weight of distributively aslant stone for set=5 Figure 2: Graph shows the average weight of distributivel y black stone for set n=10 Figure3: Graph shows the average weight of each colored stone for set n=30 put on: skeletal frame} {draw:frame} {draw:frame} Figure 4: Graph shows the average weight of each colored stone for set=5 Figure 5: Graph shows the average weight of each colored stone for set n=10 Graph6: Graph shows the average weight of each colored stone for set n=30 {draw:frame} Figure 7: Pie chart shows the sum of money proportion of the stones Reference Montegue, J. M. 2009. BIO 312L: Ecology Lab †exert 01 2009. Slides 10,11 Wikipedia, Random Sampling. www. wikipedia. com/random_sample\r\n'