OCR MEI S4 2007 June — Question 3 24 marks

Exam BoardOCR MEI
ModuleS4 (Statistics 4)
Year2007
SessionJune
Marks24
PaperDownload PDF ↗
Mark schemeDownload PDF ↗
TopicT-tests (unknown variance)
TypeTwo-sample confidence interval difference of means
DifficultyChallenging +1.2 This is a standard two-sample hypothesis test with known variances (z-test), requiring calculation of test statistic, confidence interval, and Type II error probability. Part (iii) involves working backwards from critical values and computing power, which is moderately challenging. Part (iv) tests understanding of test assumptions. While multi-part with several calculations, all techniques are standard S4 material with no novel insights required.
Spec5.05c Hypothesis test: normal distribution for population mean5.05d Confidence intervals: using normal distribution5.07a Non-parametric tests: when to use

3 An engineering company buys a certain type of component from two suppliers, A and B. It is important that, on the whole, the strengths of these components are the same from both suppliers. The company can measure the strengths in its laboratory. Random samples of seven components from supplier A and five from supplier B give the following strengths, in a convenient unit.
Supplier A25.827.426.223.528.326.427.2
Supplier B25.624.923.725.826.9
The underlying distributions of strengths are assumed to be Normal for both suppliers, with variances 2.45 for supplier A and 1.40 for supplier B.
  1. Test at the \(5 \%\) level of significance whether it is reasonable to assume that the mean strengths from the two suppliers are equal.
  2. Provide a two-sided 90\% confidence interval for the true mean difference.
  3. Show that the test procedure used in part (i), with samples of sizes 7 and 5 and a \(5 \%\) significance level, leads to acceptance of the null hypothesis of equal means if \(- 1.556 < \bar { x } - \bar { y } < 1.556\), where \(\bar { x }\) and \(\bar { y }\) are the observed sample means from suppliers A and B . Hence find the probability of a Type II error for this test procedure if in fact the true mean strength from supplier A is 2.0 units more than that from supplier B.
  4. A manager suggests that the Wilcoxon rank sum test should be used instead, comparing the median strengths for the samples of sizes 7 and 5 . Give one reason why this suggestion might be sensible and two why it might not.

Question 3:
Part (i)
AnswerMarks Guidance
AnswerMarks Guidance
\(H_0: \mu_A = \mu_B\)1 Do NOT allow \(\bar{X} = \bar{Y}\) or similar
\(H_1: \mu_A \neq \mu_B\)1 Accept absence of "population" if correct notation \(\mu\) is used. Hypotheses stated verbally must include the word "population"
Test statistic: \(\dfrac{26.4 - 25.38}{\sqrt{\dfrac{2.45}{7} + \dfrac{1.40}{5}}}\)M1 Numerator
M1Denominator two separate terms correct
M1
\(\dfrac{1.02}{\sqrt{0.63}} = \dfrac{1.02}{0.7937} = 1.285\)A1
Refer to \(N(0,1)\)1 No FT if wrong
Double-tailed 5% point is 1.961 No FT if wrong
Not significant1
No evidence that the population means differ1
Part (ii)
AnswerMarks Guidance
AnswerMarks Guidance
CI for \((\mu_A - \mu_B)\) is \(1.02 \pm\)M1
\(1.645 \times\)B1
\(0.7937 =\)M1
\(1.02 \pm 1.3056 = (-0.2856, 2.3256)\)A1 cao Zero out of 4 if not \(N(0,1)\)
Part (iii)
AnswerMarks Guidance
AnswerMarks Guidance
\(H_0\) is accepted if \(-1.96 <\) test statistic \(< 1.96\)M1 SC1 Same wrong test can get M1,M1,A0
i.e. if \(-1.96 < \dfrac{\bar{x}-\bar{y}}{0.7937} < 1.96\)M1 SC2 Use of 1.645 gets 2 out of 3
i.e. if \(-1.556 < \bar{x} - \bar{y} < 1.556\)A1 BEWARE PRINTED ANSWER
In fact, \(\bar{X} - \bar{Y} \sim N(2, 0.7937^2)\)M1
So we want \(P(-1.556 < N(2, 0.7937^2) < 1.556)\)M1
\(P\left(\dfrac{-1.556-2}{0.7937} < N(0,1) < \dfrac{1.556-2}{0.7937}\right)\)M1 Standardising
\(P(-4.48 < N(0,1) < -0.5594) = 0.2879\)A1 cao
Part (iv)
AnswerMarks Guidance
AnswerMarks Guidance
Wilcoxon would give protection if assumption of Normality is wrongE1
Wilcoxon could not really be applied if underlying variances are indeed differentE1
Wilcoxon would be less powerful (worse Type II error behaviour) with such small samples if Normality is correctE1
# Question 3:

## Part (i)
| Answer | Marks | Guidance |
|--------|-------|----------|
| $H_0: \mu_A = \mu_B$ | 1 | Do NOT allow $\bar{X} = \bar{Y}$ or similar |
| $H_1: \mu_A \neq \mu_B$ | 1 | Accept absence of "population" if correct notation $\mu$ is used. Hypotheses stated verbally must include the word "population" |
| Test statistic: $\dfrac{26.4 - 25.38}{\sqrt{\dfrac{2.45}{7} + \dfrac{1.40}{5}}}$ | M1 | Numerator |
| | M1 | Denominator two separate terms correct |
| | M1 | |
| $\dfrac{1.02}{\sqrt{0.63}} = \dfrac{1.02}{0.7937} = 1.285$ | A1 | |
| Refer to $N(0,1)$ | 1 | No FT if wrong |
| Double-tailed 5% point is 1.96 | 1 | No FT if wrong |
| Not significant | 1 | |
| No evidence that the population means differ | 1 | |

## Part (ii)
| Answer | Marks | Guidance |
|--------|-------|----------|
| CI for $(\mu_A - \mu_B)$ is $1.02 \pm$ | M1 | |
| $1.645 \times$ | B1 | |
| $0.7937 =$ | M1 | |
| $1.02 \pm 1.3056 = (-0.2856, 2.3256)$ | A1 cao | Zero out of 4 if not $N(0,1)$ |

## Part (iii)
| Answer | Marks | Guidance |
|--------|-------|----------|
| $H_0$ is accepted if $-1.96 <$ test statistic $< 1.96$ | M1 | SC1 Same wrong test can get M1,M1,A0 |
| i.e. if $-1.96 < \dfrac{\bar{x}-\bar{y}}{0.7937} < 1.96$ | M1 | SC2 Use of 1.645 gets 2 out of 3 |
| i.e. if $-1.556 < \bar{x} - \bar{y} < 1.556$ | A1 | BEWARE PRINTED ANSWER |
| In fact, $\bar{X} - \bar{Y} \sim N(2, 0.7937^2)$ | M1 | |
| So we want $P(-1.556 < N(2, 0.7937^2) < 1.556)$ | M1 | |
| $P\left(\dfrac{-1.556-2}{0.7937} < N(0,1) < \dfrac{1.556-2}{0.7937}\right)$ | M1 | Standardising |
| $P(-4.48 < N(0,1) < -0.5594) = 0.2879$ | A1 cao | |

## Part (iv)
| Answer | Marks | Guidance |
|--------|-------|----------|
| Wilcoxon would give protection if assumption of Normality is wrong | E1 | |
| Wilcoxon could not really be applied if underlying variances are indeed different | E1 | |
| Wilcoxon would be less powerful (worse Type II error behaviour) with such small samples if Normality is correct | E1 | |

---
3 An engineering company buys a certain type of component from two suppliers, A and B. It is important that, on the whole, the strengths of these components are the same from both suppliers. The company can measure the strengths in its laboratory. Random samples of seven components from supplier A and five from supplier B give the following strengths, in a convenient unit.

\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{ l l l l l l l l }
Supplier A & 25.8 & 27.4 & 26.2 & 23.5 & 28.3 & 26.4 & 27.2 \\
Supplier B & 25.6 & 24.9 & 23.7 & 25.8 & 26.9 &  &  \\
\end{tabular}
\end{center}

The underlying distributions of strengths are assumed to be Normal for both suppliers, with variances 2.45 for supplier A and 1.40 for supplier B.\\
(i) Test at the $5 \%$ level of significance whether it is reasonable to assume that the mean strengths from the two suppliers are equal.\\
(ii) Provide a two-sided 90\% confidence interval for the true mean difference.\\
(iii) Show that the test procedure used in part (i), with samples of sizes 7 and 5 and a $5 \%$ significance level, leads to acceptance of the null hypothesis of equal means if $- 1.556 < \bar { x } - \bar { y } < 1.556$, where $\bar { x }$ and $\bar { y }$ are the observed sample means from suppliers A and B . Hence find the probability of a Type II error for this test procedure if in fact the true mean strength from supplier A is 2.0 units more than that from supplier B.\\
(iv) A manager suggests that the Wilcoxon rank sum test should be used instead, comparing the median strengths for the samples of sizes 7 and 5 . Give one reason why this suggestion might be sensible and two why it might not.

\hfill \mbox{\textit{OCR MEI S4 2007 Q3 [24]}}