Graphic skewness

As a test, this approximation procedure for skew boundaries was used with a nondissociating system as a model, and while the plot for the model showed a scatter of up to 10 fx/cm owing to the graphical interpolation procedures being used, no drift indicative of apparent nonideality caused by any possible deficiency in theory was observed the Qj values scattered about zero over the range of f (zj) for which they were calculated. 

The technique involves superimposing the tolerance limits on the graphical representation (i.e., distribution curve) of the process capability curve. (See Fig. 1.) If the curve fits well within the tolerance limits, the inherent reproducibility of the process is considered adequate. If the width of the curve straddles the tolerance limits, however, the inherent reproducibility is considered inadequate. Finally, if the curve is skewed near the right or left limit, the model will predict that defects should occur. 

Figure 2. Graphical depiction of r (exponential tailing component) and a (gaus-sian component) features of an asymmetrical peak (t/a ratio related to peak skew)...

The range in EF is from zero to unity, with a racemic value of 0.5. Enantiomer fractions are preferred to ERs, as the EF range is bounded, and a deviation from the racemic value in one direction is the same as that in the other. For example, if the (—)-enantiomer is twice the concentration as its antipode, the EF is 0.333, which is the same deviation (0.167) from a racemic EF of 0.5 as the opposite case of the (+)-enantiomer at twice the concentration as the (—)-enantiomer (EF = 0.667). The respective ERs would be 0.5 and 2. The corresponding deviations of 0.5 and 1, respectively, are not the same deviation from the racemic ER of 1. Thus, ERs can produce skewed data inappropriate for statistical summaries such as sample mean and standard error [109]. As a result, EEs are more amenable compared to ERs for graphical representations of data, mathematical expressions, mass balance determination, and environmental modelling [107, 109]. Individual ER and EF measurements can be converted [107, 108] ... 

Descriptive statistics. A series of physical measurements can be described numerically. If for example, we have recorded the concentration of 1000 different samples in a research problem, it is not possible to provide the user with a table giving all 1000 results. In this case, it is normal to summarize the main trends. This can be done not only graphically, but also by considering the overall parameters such as mean and standard deviation, skewness etc. Specific values can be used to give an overall picture of a set of data. 

The mode and the median may be determined graphically but the above summation has to be carried out for the determination of the mean. For a slightly skewed distribution the approximate relationship, meanmode = 3(mean-median) holds. For a symmetrical distribution, all three averages coincide. These means represent the distribution in only two of its properties. The characteristics of a particle size distribution are its total number, length, surface, volume (mass) and moment. Note that ... 

The second assumption concerns the distribution of the residual errors. Ideally, the weighted residuals should be normally, or at least symmetrically, distributed. Effective graphical displays to check this include histograms and quantile-quantile (QQ) plots (5). If a marked skewness is observed, it may indicate that a transformation, for example, a log transformation, of the data may be necessary (13). 

The box plot has proved to be a popular graphical method for displaying and summarizing univariate data, to compare parallel batches of data, and to supplement more complex displays with univariate information. Its appeal is due to the simplicity of the graphical construction (based on quartiles) and the many features that it displays (location, spread, skewness, and potential outliers). Box plots are useful for summarizing distributions of treatment outcomes. A good example would be the comparison of the distribution of response to treatment at different dose levels or exposure (as measured by area under the plasma concentration-time curve) as in Figure 37.3. 

FIGURE 4.3 Graphical representation of kurtosis, K, and skewness, S, in comparison to the Gaussian (standard) distribution (upper left). The right-hand side shows leptokurtic (peaked) or platykurtic (flatted) distribution as well as positive skewed distribution (fronting) and negative skewed distribution (tailing). 

The same bootstrap data sets were then used to fit Eq. (9.17). Of the 1000 bootstrap data sets, all 1000 converged successfully. The results are presented in Table 9.17 and shown graphically in Figure 9.17. All the random effects were normally distributed, except 04 which showed right skewness. The relative bias of the parameters was less than + 3% and the confidence intervals for CL and VI were precise (<10% CV). The CIs for Q2 and V2 were not as precise which was expected because the data set consisted of sparse data. Examination of the concentration-time profile showed there were few sam-... 

Typical levels of impurities and trace elements are summarised in Table 3.3. They are based on information viewed by the author and on published spectro-graphic analyses of 25 high-calcium American limestones [3.13]. Further information about the skew distributions of the concentration of trace elements is given in section 28.1.8. 

Often, in engineering analysis, there will be a theoretical value of a parameter (for example, the outlet temperature of a reactor calculated from an energy balance), and there will be an actually-measured value. It is often desirable to compare them. One easy graphical way to do this is with a parity plot. In a parity plot, one plots the measured values against the experimental values (for the same trial). The y=x line is also plotted as a reference. If the theoretical and experimental values agree, they should lie close to the y=x line and be randomly scattered around it. If they do not (due to either a problematic assumption in the theory, errors in measurement, or both), then the data will be skewed away from the y=x line. This is also useful for identifying outlying measurements. 

The graphics window immediately displays Fig. 3.4. It shows the result of the relative error data distribution normality test. The discrete points are very close to the skew straight lines in Fig. 3.4, which means the graphic is linear, it can be concluded that the relative error approximately obeys the rule of normal distribution of data. 

Graphically, the skewness can be seen from a histogram, which plots the frequency of a value against the value. Examples of left and right skewness are shown in Fig. 1.1. 

---