Mean estimation

Event Group Estimated Mean Estimated Standard Deviation... 

Expected Variability of Measurement (Coefficient Distribution of Variation) (Model) 95% Confidence Interval About the Mean Estimate (percent) ... 

Note that the variance does not depend on the true value x, and the mean estimator x has the least variance. The finite sampling bias is the difference between the estimate x and the true value x, and represents the finite sampling systematic part of the generalized error... 

These CFAR procedures suffer from the fact that they are specifically tailored to the assumption of uniform and homogeneous clutter inside the reference window. Based on these assumptions, they estimate the unknown clutter power level using the unbiased and most efficient arithmetic mean estimator. Improved CFAR procedures should be robust with respect to different clutter background and target situations. Also in non-homogeneous situations CFAR techniques should remain able to provide reliable clutter power estimations. 

The estimated mean composition is then given by the local linear mean estimate (LLME) ... 

Also, by a least-squares analysis or some other suitable means, estimates of the parameters within a proposed model may be obtained. This allows the calculation of predicted reaction rates at each experimental point and thus an assessment of the total amount of variability which can be accounted for by the proposed model... 

Difference between sample means Estimated SE of the difference... 

CL for the population mean, estimated from n measurements on a confidence level of 95%... 

It is obvious that, for continuous flow reactors, designing the reactor means estimating its residence time rather than volume. Continuous flow reactors of the same type with different volumes but the same residence time will give the same conversion. 

Uncertainty associated with randomly drawing samples from a population. Statistics, such as the mean, estimated from a random sample are subject to random fluctuations when estimated repeatedly for independent sets of samples from the same population. 

It should be noted that for completely random errors, the relative error in kA may be improved by taking a great many measurements. For n measurements of equal estimated error (Table IV.8) the estimated error in the final mean will be decreased by a factor of (n — 1). Thus 10 separate measurements of kx each of equal estimated error Afcx will yield a mean value of kA in which the mean estimated error is A/ca/3. To reduce Akx by a factor of 10, a prohibitive number of results is needed, namely n 100. 

Erom a probabilistic approach it should be possible to derive the exposure for any age group or any percentile, as shown for example in Eig. 6.3. In Eig. 6.3, upper and lower limits are represented by the line either side of the mean estimate represented by the diamond. In addition the effect of gender, socioeconomic class, ethnicity, etc., can be evaluated, provided they have been identified in the food intake survey, although as the group studied becomes smaller greater uncertainties inevitably arise. Exposure can be expressed as mg/kg actual body weight or mg/person/day or mg/kg diet. 

Mean estimate for any given percentile, with upper and lower confidence limits. 

An alternative relationship is a curve such that, when used with an approximation of global U distribution, it is in agreement with the global mean estimate derived from the technique (Wanninkhof, 1992 henceforth W92). Although this is a sensible approach, the main difficulty is in deciding the appropriate shape of the curve. Wanninkhof used a dependence of on based on results from wind tunnel studies and n was assumed to be 0.5. 

---