Timeline for Correct measure of error for experimental data
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
4 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 27, 2017 at 7:09 | comment | added | Adam Williams | To JMLCarter on the normally distributed noise you, were correct to point out that I have made this assumption :). What impact does normal noise have on the error analysis vs other distributions? | |
| Sep 27, 2017 at 7:07 | comment | added | Adam Williams | Thanks sammy, as a follow up, lets say per N repeats n=1000, doesn't this mean that N really = 1000 single point measurements? Out of interest why is SEM the correct choice for the measure of error rather than SD? | |
| Sep 26, 2017 at 23:32 | comment | added | JMLCarter | I agree, but note: This is founded on the assumption that the noise has a Normal distribution - an assumption that preferably has some justification but frequently just seems to be overlooked. There are numerous other possible distributions. For example, if due to a single random source of error (a single dice role), the distribution would be flat. | |
| Sep 26, 2017 at 22:29 | history | answered | sammy gerbil | CC BY-SA 3.0 |