OCR FS1 AS 2021 June — Question 3 12 marks

Exam BoardOCR
ModuleFS1 AS (Further Statistics 1 AS)
Year2021
SessionJune
Marks12
TopicChi-squared test of independence
TypeStandard 3×3 contingency table
DifficultyStandard +0.3 This is a standard chi-squared test of independence question requiring students to identify that an expected frequency is below 5 and conclude cells must be combined. It's a routine application of a well-known rule from the specification with straightforward calculation, making it slightly easier than average for A-level Further Statistics.
Spec5.06a Chi-squared: contingency tables

3 At a cinema there are three film sessions each Saturday, "early", "middle" and "late". The numbers of the audience, in different age groups, at the three showings on a randomly chosen Saturday are given in Table 1. \begin{table}[h] \end{table}
QuestionSolutionMarksAOsGuidance
1(a)-0.954 BCB2 [2]1.1 1.1SC: If B0, give B1 if two of 7.04, 29.0[4], -13.6[4] (or 35.2, 145[.2], -68.2) seen
1(b)Points lie close to a straight line Line has negative gradientB1 B1 [2]2.2b 1.1Must refer to line, not just "negative correlation"
1(c)No, it will be the same as \(x \rightarrow a\) is a linear transformationB1 [1]2.2aOE. Either "same" with correct reason, or "disagree" with correct reason. Allow any clear valid technical term
2(a)NeitherB1 [1]1.2
2(b)\(q = 1.13 + 0.620 p\)B1B1 B1 [3]1.1,1.1 1.10.62(0) correct; both numbers correct Fully correct answer including letters
2(c)(i)2.68B1ft [1]1.1awrt 2.68, ft on their (b) if letters correct
2(c)(ii)2.5 is within data range, and points (here) are close to line/well correlatedB1 B1 [2]2.2b 2.2bAt least one reason, allow "no because points not close to line" Full argument, two reasons needed
2(d)
Not much data here/points scattered/ possible outliers
So not very reliable
M1 A1 [2]2.3 1.1Reason for not very reliable (not "extrapolation") Full argument and conclusion, not too assertive (not wholly unreliable!)
3(a)Expected frequency for Middle/25 to 60 is 4.4 which is < 5 so must combine cellsB1*ft depB1 [2]2.4 3.5bCorrectly obtain this \(F _ { E }\), ft on addition errors " < 5" explicit and correct deduction
3(b)
EarlyMiddleLate
29.423.131.5
26.620.928.5
EarlyMiddleLate
0.99180.41602.2937
1.09620.45982.5351
B11.1
Both, allow 28.4 for 28.5
awrt 2.29, but allow 2.3 In range [2.53, 2.54]
QuestionSolutionMarksAOsGuidance
3(c)
\(\mathrm { H } _ { 0 }\) : no association between session and age group. \(\mathrm { H } _ { 1 }\) : some association
\(\Sigma X ^ { 2 } = 7.793\)
\(v = 2 , \chi ^ { 2 } ( 2 ) _ { \text {crit } } = 5.991\)
Reject \(\mathrm { H } _ { 0 }\).
Significant evidence of association between session attended and age group.
B1
B1
B1
M1ft
A1ft [5]
1.1
1.1
1.1
1.1
2.2b
Both. Allow "independent" etc
Correct value of \(X ^ { 2 }\), awrt 7.79 (allow even if wrong in (b))
Correct CV and comparison
Correct first conclusion, FT on their TS only
Contextualised, not too assertive
3(d)The two biggest contributions to \(\chi ^ { 2 }\) are both for the late session ... ... when the proportion of younger people is higher, and of older people is lower, than the null hypothesis would suggest.
M1ft
A1ft
[2]
1.1
2.4
Refer to biggest contribution(s), FT on their answers to (b), needs "reject \(\mathrm { H } _ { 0 }\) "
Full answer, referring to at least one cell (ignore comments on next highest cells)
\multirow[t]{2}{*}{4}\multirow{2}{*}{}\multirow{2}{*}{OR:}
\(\frac { { } ^ { 2 m } C _ { 2 } \times m } { { } ^ { 3 m } C _ { 3 } }\)
\(= \frac { 2 m ( 2 m - 1 ) } { 2 } \times m \div \frac { 3 m ( 3 m - 1 ) ( 3 m - 2 ) } { 6 }\)
\(= \frac { 2 m ( 2 m - 1 ) } { ( 3 m - 1 ) ( 3 m - 2 ) }\) \(\frac { 2 m ( 2 m - 1 ) } { ( 3 m - 1 ) ( 3 m - 2 ) } = \frac { 28 } { 55 }\)
\(\Rightarrow 16 m ^ { 2 } - 71 m + 28 = 0\)
\(m = 4\) BC
Reject \(m = \frac { 7 } { 16 }\) as \(m\) is an integer
M1
M1
A1
M1
A1
M1
A1
[7]
3.1b
3.1b
2.1
3.1a
2.1
1.1
3.2a
Use \({ } ^ { 2 m } C _ { 2 }\) and \(m\)
Divide by \({ } ^ { 3 m } C _ { 3 }\)
Correct expression in terms of \(m\) (allow with \(m\) not cancelled yet)
Equate to \(\frac { 28 } { 55 }\) \simplify to three-term quadratic
Correct simplified quadratic, or (quadratic) \(\times m , = 0\), aef Solve to get both 4 and \(\frac { 7 } { 16 }\)
Explicitly reject \(m = \frac { 7 } { 16 }\)
\(\frac { 2 m ( 2 m - 1 ) \times m \times 3 ! } { 3 m ( 3 m - 1 ) ( 3 m - 2 ) \times 2 }\) then as above
Multiplication method can get full marks, but if no 3 or 3 !, max
M1M0A0 M1A0M0A0

3 At a cinema there are three film sessions each Saturday, "early", "middle" and "late". The numbers of the audience, in different age groups, at the three showings on a randomly chosen Saturday are given in Table 1.

\begin{table}[h]

\end{table}

\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{|l|l|l|l|l|l|l|}
\hline
\multicolumn{3}{|c|}{Question} & Solution & Marks & AOs & Guidance \\
\hline
1 & (a) &  & -0.954 BC & B2 [2] & 1.1 1.1 & SC: If B0, give B1 if two of 7.04, 29.0[4], -13.6[4] (or 35.2, 145[.2], -68.2) seen \\
\hline
1 & (b) &  & Points lie close to a straight line Line has negative gradient & B1 B1 [2] & 2.2b 1.1 & Must refer to line, not just "negative correlation" \\
\hline
1 & (c) &  & No, it will be the same as $x \rightarrow a$ is a linear transformation & B1 [1] & 2.2a & OE. Either "same" with correct reason, or "disagree" with correct reason. Allow any clear valid technical term \\
\hline
2 & (a) &  & Neither & B1 [1] & 1.2 &  \\
\hline
2 & (b) &  & $q = 1.13 + 0.620 p$ & B1B1 B1 [3] & 1.1,1.1 1.1 & 0.62(0) correct; both numbers correct Fully correct answer including letters \\
\hline
2 & (c) & (i) & 2.68 & B1ft [1] & 1.1 & awrt 2.68, ft on their (b) if letters correct \\
\hline
2 & (c) & (ii) & 2.5 is within data range, and points (here) are close to line/well correlated & B1 B1 [2] & 2.2b 2.2b & At least one reason, allow "no because points not close to line" Full argument, two reasons needed \\
\hline
2 & (d) &  & \begin{tabular}{l}
Not much data here/points scattered/ possible outliers \\
So not very reliable \\
\end{tabular} & M1 A1 [2] & 2.3 1.1 & Reason for not very reliable (not "extrapolation") Full argument and conclusion, not too assertive (not wholly unreliable!) \\
\hline
3 & (a) &  & Expected frequency for Middle/25 to 60 is 4.4 which is < 5 so must combine cells & B1*ft depB1 [2] & 2.4 3.5b & Correctly obtain this $F _ { E }$, ft on addition errors " < 5" explicit and correct deduction \\
\hline
3 & (b) &  & \begin{tabular}{ | c | c | c | }
\hline
Early & Middle & Late \\
\hline
29.4 & 23.1 & 31.5 \\
\hline
26.6 & 20.9 & 28.5 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}\begin{tabular}{ | c | c | c | }
\hline
Early & Middle & Late \\
\hline
0.9918 & 0.4160 & 2.2937 \\
\hline
1.0962 & 0.4598 & 2.5351 \\
\hline
\end{tabular} & B1 & 1.1 & \begin{tabular}{l}
Both, allow 28.4 for 28.5 \\
awrt 2.29, but allow 2.3 In range [2.53, 2.54] \\
\end{tabular} \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}

\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{|l|l|l|l|l|l|l|}
\hline
\multicolumn{3}{|c|}{Question} & Solution & Marks & AOs & Guidance \\
\hline
3 & (c) &  & \begin{tabular}{l}
$\mathrm { H } _ { 0 }$ : no association between session and age group. $\mathrm { H } _ { 1 }$ : some association \\
$\Sigma X ^ { 2 } = 7.793$ \\
$v = 2 , \chi ^ { 2 } ( 2 ) _ { \text {crit } } = 5.991$ \\
Reject $\mathrm { H } _ { 0 }$. \\
Significant evidence of association between session attended and age group. \\
\end{tabular} & \begin{tabular}{l}
B1 \\
B1 \\
B1 \\
M1ft \\
A1ft [5] \\
\end{tabular} & \begin{tabular}{l}
1.1 \\
1.1 \\
1.1 \\
1.1 \\
2.2b \\
\end{tabular} & \begin{tabular}{l}
Both. Allow "independent" etc \\
Correct value of $X ^ { 2 }$, awrt 7.79 (allow even if wrong in (b)) \\
Correct CV and comparison \\
Correct first conclusion, FT on their TS only \\
Contextualised, not too assertive \\
\end{tabular} \\
\hline
3 & (d) &  & The two biggest contributions to $\chi ^ { 2 }$ are both for the late session ... ... when the proportion of younger people is higher, and of older people is lower, than the null hypothesis would suggest. & \begin{tabular}{l}
M1ft \\
A1ft \\[0pt]
[2] \\
\end{tabular} & \begin{tabular}{l}
1.1 \\
2.4 \\
\end{tabular} & \begin{tabular}{l}
Refer to biggest contribution(s), FT on their answers to (b), needs "reject $\mathrm { H } _ { 0 }$ " \\
Full answer, referring to at least one cell (ignore comments on next highest cells) \\
\end{tabular} \\
\hline
\multirow[t]{2}{*}{4} & \multirow{2}{*}{} & \multirow{2}{*}{OR:} & \begin{tabular}{l}
$\frac { { } ^ { 2 m } C _ { 2 } \times m } { { } ^ { 3 m } C _ { 3 } }$ \\
$= \frac { 2 m ( 2 m - 1 ) } { 2 } \times m \div \frac { 3 m ( 3 m - 1 ) ( 3 m - 2 ) } { 6 }$ \\
$= \frac { 2 m ( 2 m - 1 ) } { ( 3 m - 1 ) ( 3 m - 2 ) }$ \(\frac { 2 m ( 2 m - 1 ) } { ( 3 m - 1 ) ( 3 m - 2 ) } = \frac { 28 } { 55 }\) \\
$\Rightarrow 16 m ^ { 2 } - 71 m + 28 = 0$ \\
$m = 4$ BC \\
Reject $m = \frac { 7 } { 16 }$ as $m$ is an integer \\
\end{tabular} & \begin{tabular}{l}
M1 \\
M1 \\
A1 \\
M1 \\
A1 \\
M1 \\
A1 \\[0pt]
[7] \\
\end{tabular} & \begin{tabular}{l}
3.1b \\
3.1b \\
2.1 \\
3.1a \\
2.1 \\
1.1 \\
3.2a \\
\end{tabular} & \begin{tabular}{l}
Use ${ } ^ { 2 m } C _ { 2 }$ and $m$ \\
Divide by ${ } ^ { 3 m } C _ { 3 }$ \\
Correct expression in terms of $m$ (allow with $m$ not cancelled yet) \\
Equate to $\frac { 28 } { 55 }$ \& simplify to three-term quadratic \\
Correct simplified quadratic, or (quadratic) $\times m , = 0$, aef Solve to get both 4 and $\frac { 7 } { 16 }$ \\
Explicitly reject $m = \frac { 7 } { 16 }$ \\
\end{tabular} \\
\hline
 &  &  & $\frac { 2 m ( 2 m - 1 ) \times m \times 3 ! } { 3 m ( 3 m - 1 ) ( 3 m - 2 ) \times 2 }$ then as above &  &  & \begin{tabular}{l}
Multiplication method can get full marks, but if no 3 or 3 !, max \\
M1M0A0 M1A0M0A0 \\
\end{tabular} \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}

\hfill \mbox{\textit{OCR FS1 AS 2021 Q3 [12]}}
This paper (2 questions)
View full paper