Normal distribution proportions within limits

If we plot a Normal distribution for an arbitrary mean and standard deviation, as shown in Figure 4, it ean be shown that at lcr about the mean value, the area under the frequeney eurve is approximately 68.27% of the total, and at 2cr, the area is 95.45% of the total under the eurve, and so on. This property of the Normal distribution then beeomes useful in estimating the proportion of individuals within preseribed limits. 

A prediction interval is fundamentally different from a confidence statement. It is appropriate when trying to find the bounds for future outcomes, given that some knowledge of past performance exists. A prediction interval is a confidence statement about future individual samples. In both instances, the method for interval estimates assumes that the data are normally distributed. The tolerance interval is used when one is interested in finding the proportion of future samples falling within limits, with a stated confidence level. 

A distinction is made between the random variable Z and the standard normal distribution tabulated values, also equal to the right hand side of Eq. 13, which are designated by r. The expected value of Z is zero, and the standard deviation is 1. When sampling is conducted from a normal population that has been transformed into Z values, certain fractions or proportions of all of the values are contained within specified - and -t- multiples of Z. Just as in the case discussed previously for the standard deviation, 68.3% of all values drawn from the population are within the interval of Z 95.5% of all values within 2Z and 99.7% within 3Z. When considering either actual v values or Z values, these intervals are called the one, two, and three sigma limits respectively, and they represent the long run outcomes of sampling. 

Integration of Eq. (10.28) along the cross-section of the hydrodynamic layer allows us to check whether within its limits the radial velocity component is proportional to the tangential derivative of the velocity distribution along the bubble surface, which differs slightly from the potential distribution. The effect of a boundary layer on the normal velocity component and on inertia-free deposition of particles should be therefore very small. The formula for the collision efficiency given by Mileva as an inertia-free approximation is thus VRc times less than the collision efficiency according to Sutherland, which is definitely erroneous. 

Let us now consider many sources of electrons uniformly distributed at all distances from the surface of the solid and detect those unscattered electrons which emerge normal to the surface. What sort of distribution of the depths of these electrons can be detected This new function, P d), will have the same exponential form as P d) since the detection of electrons from different depths in the solid is directly proportional to the probability of electron escape from each depth. What percentage of electrons will have come from within a distance of one IMFP from the surface Recall from our definition of probability that this is simply the integral between the limits of 0 and 1 in the exponential function divided by the integral over all space... 

---