updating to w06 content outline. still no substance
This commit is contained in:
@@ -1,7 +1,8 @@
|
||||
---
|
||||
title: "Week 7 R Lecture"
|
||||
author: "Jeremy Foote"
|
||||
date: "April 4, 2019"
|
||||
title: "Week 6 R lecture"
|
||||
subtitle: "Statistics and statistical programming \nNorthwestern University \nMTS 525"
|
||||
author: "Aaron Shaw"
|
||||
date: "May 3, 2019"
|
||||
output: html_document
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -9,97 +10,17 @@ output: html_document
|
||||
knitr::opts_chunk$set(echo = TRUE)
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
## Categorical Data
|
||||
## T-tests
|
||||
You learned the theory/concepts behind t-tests last week, so here's a brief run-down on how to use built-in functions in R to conduct them and interpret the results.
|
||||
|
||||
The goal of this script is to help you think about analyzing categorical data, including proportions, tables, chi-squared tests, and simulation.
|
||||
## ANOVAs
|
||||
|
||||
### Estimating proportions
|
||||
Analogous situation with t-tests. Here's a brief introduction to how they work in R.
|
||||
|
||||
If a survey of 50 randomly sampled Chicagoans found that 45% of them thought that Giordano's made the best deep dish pizza, what would be the 95% confidence interval for the true proportion of Chicagoans who prefer Giordano's?
|
||||
## Visualizing confidence intervals
|
||||
|
||||
Can we reject the hypothesis that 50% of Chicagoans prefer Giordano's?
|
||||
We spent a lot of time on confidence intervals in the past few weeks. Since they can be so useful, surely we should learn some approaches to incorporating them into data visualizations.
|
||||
|
||||
## Date/time arithmetic
|
||||
|
||||
```{r}
|
||||
est = .45
|
||||
sample_size = 50
|
||||
SE = sqrt(est*(1-est)/sample_size)
|
||||
|
||||
conf_int = c(est - 1.96 * SE, est + 1.96 * SE)
|
||||
conf_int
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
What if we had the same result but had sampled 500 people?
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
```{r}
|
||||
est = .45
|
||||
sample_size = 500
|
||||
SE = sqrt(est*(1-est)/sample_size)
|
||||
|
||||
conf_int = c(est - 1.96 * SE, est + 1.96 * SE)
|
||||
conf_int
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Tabular Data
|
||||
|
||||
The Iris dataset is composed of measurements of flower dimensions. It comes packaged with R and is often used in examples. Here we make a table of how often each species in the dataset has a sepal width greater than 3.
|
||||
|
||||
```{r}
|
||||
|
||||
table(iris$Species, iris$Sepal.Width > 3)
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
The chi-squared test is a test of how much the frequencies we see in a table differ from what we would expect if there was no difference between the groups.
|
||||
|
||||
```{r}
|
||||
|
||||
chisq.test(table(iris$Species, iris$Sepal.Width > 3))
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
The incredibly low p-value means that it is very unlikely that these came from the same distribution and that sepal width differs by species.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
## Using Simulation
|
||||
|
||||
When the assumptions of Chi-squared tests aren't met, we can use simulation to approximate how likely a given result is.
|
||||
|
||||
The book uses the example of a medical practitioner who has 3 complications out of 62 procedures, while the typical rate is 10%.
|
||||
|
||||
The null hypothesis is that this practitioner's true rate is also 10%, so we're trying to figure out how rare it would be to have 3 or fewer complications, if the true rate is 10%.
|
||||
|
||||
```{r}
|
||||
# We write a function that we are going to replicate
|
||||
simulation <- function(rate = .1, n = 62){
|
||||
# Draw n random numbers from a uniform distribution from 0 to 1
|
||||
draws = runif(n)
|
||||
# If rate = .4, on average, .4 of the draws will be less than .4
|
||||
# So, we consider those draws where the value is less than `rate` as complications
|
||||
complication_count = sum(draws < rate)
|
||||
# Then, we return the total count
|
||||
return(complication_count)
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
# The replicate function runs a function many times
|
||||
|
||||
simulated_complications <- replicate(5000, simulation())
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
We can look at our simulated complications
|
||||
|
||||
```{r}
|
||||
|
||||
hist(simulated_complications)
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
And determine how many of them are as extreme or more extreme than the value we saw. This is the p-value.
|
||||
|
||||
```{r}
|
||||
|
||||
sum(simulated_complications <= 3)/length(simulated_complications)
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Last, but not least, another wrinkle in time...or at least how to manage date-time objects in R.
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user