Talk:1725: Linear Regression - Revision history

172.71.26.36 at 12:37, 10 January 2025

2025-01-10T12:37:03Z

162.158.74.118: it's a cocktail glass

2025-01-10T12:32:25Z

it's a cocktail glass

162.158.234.40 at 09:43, 10 April 2018

2018-04-10T09:43:16Z

108.162.219.56 at 00:07, 3 September 2016

2016-09-03T00:07:16Z

162.158.83.228 at 19:01, 2 September 2016

2016-09-02T19:01:39Z

162.158.86.119 at 09:32, 30 August 2016

2016-08-30T09:32:28Z

Davidy22 at 22:22, 28 August 2016

2016-08-28T22:22:25Z

172.68.11.81 at 19:31, 28 August 2016

2016-08-28T19:31:36Z

Cosmogoblin at 18:03, 28 August 2016

2016-08-28T18:03:06Z

Davidy22 at 02:56, 28 August 2016

2016-08-28T02:56:58Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:37, 10 January 2025
Line 27:		Line 27:

	Does anyone else think the "dog" looks like a cocktail glass with a stirrer on the left and a slice of lime on the right, held aloft upon a platter? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.74.118\|162.158.74.118]] 12:32, 10 January 2025 (UTC)		Does anyone else think the "dog" looks like a cocktail glass with a stirrer on the left and a slice of lime on the right, held aloft upon a platter? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.74.118\|162.158.74.118]] 12:32, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
		+	:Absolutely not. It's a straw and a slice of lemon, and I can't perceive how you could be so wrong! [[Special:Contributions/172.71.26.36\|172.71.26.36]] 12:37, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:32, 10 January 2025
Line 25:		Line 25:

	This is irrelevant to the humor of the comic, but I fixed the paragraph on confidence intervals because it contained at least three misinterpretations (I have a MSc in statistics). The phrasing can be improved if needed. Don't worry though, [http://www.andrewgelman.com/2017/12/28/stupid-ass-statisticians-dont-know-goddam-confidence-interval even experienced statisticians get it wrong sometimes...] [[Special:Contributions/162.158.234.40\|162.158.234.40]] 09:43, 10 April 2018 (UTC)		This is irrelevant to the humor of the comic, but I fixed the paragraph on confidence intervals because it contained at least three misinterpretations (I have a MSc in statistics). The phrasing can be improved if needed. Don't worry though, [http://www.andrewgelman.com/2017/12/28/stupid-ass-statisticians-dont-know-goddam-confidence-interval even experienced statisticians get it wrong sometimes...] [[Special:Contributions/162.158.234.40\|162.158.234.40]] 09:43, 10 April 2018 (UTC)
		+
		+	Does anyone else think the "dog" looks like a cocktail glass with a stirrer on the left and a slice of lime on the right, held aloft upon a platter? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.74.118\|162.158.74.118]] 12:32, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:43, 10 April 2018
Line 23:		Line 23:

	Rex is also Latin for king, which may be related in the context of constellations. {{unsigned ip\|172.68.11.81}}		Rex is also Latin for king, which may be related in the context of constellations. {{unsigned ip\|172.68.11.81}}
		+
		+	This is irrelevant to the humor of the comic, but I fixed the paragraph on confidence intervals because it contained at least three misinterpretations (I have a MSc in statistics). The phrasing can be improved if needed. Don't worry though, [http://www.andrewgelman.com/2017/12/28/stupid-ass-statisticians-dont-know-goddam-confidence-interval even experienced statisticians get it wrong sometimes...] [[Special:Contributions/162.158.234.40\|162.158.234.40]] 09:43, 10 April 2018 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:07, 3 September 2016
Line 16:		Line 16:

	:Asuming the top left of the image as 0/0 and measuring in pixels I get f(x)=-0,135x + 124,8 with R²=0,0197, calcuated with LibreOffice. The line in the image has f(x)=-0,094x+125. If I change a single point by one or two the R² value varies from 0,0195 to 0,0199. If I substract 10% of the x value from the y value R² increases to 0,0574. So I think R²=0,06 is a little bit inaccurate, but not completely wrong. --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.83.228\|162.158.83.228]] 19:01, 2 September 2016 (UTC)		:Asuming the top left of the image as 0/0 and measuring in pixels I get f(x)=-0,135x + 124,8 with R²=0,0197, calcuated with LibreOffice. The line in the image has f(x)=-0,094x+125. If I change a single point by one or two the R² value varies from 0,0195 to 0,0199. If I substract 10% of the x value from the y value R² increases to 0,0574. So I think R²=0,06 is a little bit inaccurate, but not completely wrong. --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.83.228\|162.158.83.228]] 19:01, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
		+
		+	::I think R^2 = 6% is very inaccurate if the true R^2 = 2%. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.219.56\|108.162.219.56]] 00:07, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

	Does anybody know of any real-world examples of a similarly low R^2 given in genuine research? It would be worth mentioning their existence if we can find one. [[User:Cosmogoblin\|Cosmogoblin]] ([[User talk:Cosmogoblin\|talk]]) 18:03, 28 August 2016 (UTC)		Does anybody know of any real-world examples of a similarly low R^2 given in genuine research? It would be worth mentioning their existence if we can find one. [[User:Cosmogoblin\|Cosmogoblin]] ([[User talk:Cosmogoblin\|talk]]) 18:03, 28 August 2016 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:01, 2 September 2016
Line 14:		Line 14:

	did someone check if it really was a Rsquared of 0,06?[[Special:Contributions/141.101.104.67\|141.101.104.67]] 20:56, 27 August 2016 (UTC)		did someone check if it really was a Rsquared of 0,06?[[Special:Contributions/141.101.104.67\|141.101.104.67]] 20:56, 27 August 2016 (UTC)
		+
		+	:Asuming the top left of the image as 0/0 and measuring in pixels I get f(x)=-0,135x + 124,8 with R²=0,0197, calcuated with LibreOffice. The line in the image has f(x)=-0,094x+125. If I change a single point by one or two the R² value varies from 0,0195 to 0,0199. If I substract 10% of the x value from the y value R² increases to 0,0574. So I think R²=0,06 is a little bit inaccurate, but not completely wrong. --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.83.228\|162.158.83.228]] 19:01, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

	Does anybody know of any real-world examples of a similarly low R^2 given in genuine research? It would be worth mentioning their existence if we can find one. [[User:Cosmogoblin\|Cosmogoblin]] ([[User talk:Cosmogoblin\|talk]]) 18:03, 28 August 2016 (UTC)		Does anybody know of any real-world examples of a similarly low R^2 given in genuine research? It would be worth mentioning their existence if we can find one. [[User:Cosmogoblin\|Cosmogoblin]] ([[User talk:Cosmogoblin\|talk]]) 18:03, 28 August 2016 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:32, 30 August 2016
Line 16:		Line 16:

	Does anybody know of any real-world examples of a similarly low R^2 given in genuine research? It would be worth mentioning their existence if we can find one. [[User:Cosmogoblin\|Cosmogoblin]] ([[User talk:Cosmogoblin\|talk]]) 18:03, 28 August 2016 (UTC)		Does anybody know of any real-world examples of a similarly low R^2 given in genuine research? It would be worth mentioning their existence if we can find one. [[User:Cosmogoblin\|Cosmogoblin]] ([[User talk:Cosmogoblin\|talk]]) 18:03, 28 August 2016 (UTC)
		+	: In published research? I don't recall any. In submissions for review? At least twice. And of course one case where this comic could and should be used as an educational drawing - student reports, master's theses, etc. I've seen "conclusions" drawn from weaker data in those, far too many times for my mental health...--[[Special:Contributions/162.158.86.119\|162.158.86.119]] 09:32, 30 August 2016 (UTC)

	Rex is also Latin for king, which may be related in the context of constellations. {{unsigned ip\|172.68.11.81}}		Rex is also Latin for king, which may be related in the context of constellations. {{unsigned ip\|172.68.11.81}}

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:22, 28 August 2016
Line 17:		Line 17:
	Does anybody know of any real-world examples of a similarly low R^2 given in genuine research? It would be worth mentioning their existence if we can find one. [[User:Cosmogoblin\|Cosmogoblin]] ([[User talk:Cosmogoblin\|talk]]) 18:03, 28 August 2016 (UTC)		Does anybody know of any real-world examples of a similarly low R^2 given in genuine research? It would be worth mentioning their existence if we can find one. [[User:Cosmogoblin\|Cosmogoblin]] ([[User talk:Cosmogoblin\|talk]]) 18:03, 28 August 2016 (UTC)

−	Rex is also Latin for king, which may be related in the context of constellations.	+	Rex is also Latin for king, which may be related in the context of constellations. {{unsigned ip\|172.68.11.81}}

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:31, 28 August 2016
Line 16:		Line 16:

	Does anybody know of any real-world examples of a similarly low R^2 given in genuine research? It would be worth mentioning their existence if we can find one. [[User:Cosmogoblin\|Cosmogoblin]] ([[User talk:Cosmogoblin\|talk]]) 18:03, 28 August 2016 (UTC)		Does anybody know of any real-world examples of a similarly low R^2 given in genuine research? It would be worth mentioning their existence if we can find one. [[User:Cosmogoblin\|Cosmogoblin]] ([[User talk:Cosmogoblin\|talk]]) 18:03, 28 August 2016 (UTC)
		+
		+	Rex is also Latin for king, which may be related in the context of constellations.

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:03, 28 August 2016
Line 14:		Line 14:

	did someone check if it really was a Rsquared of 0,06?[[Special:Contributions/141.101.104.67\|141.101.104.67]] 20:56, 27 August 2016 (UTC)		did someone check if it really was a Rsquared of 0,06?[[Special:Contributions/141.101.104.67\|141.101.104.67]] 20:56, 27 August 2016 (UTC)
		+
		+	Does anybody know of any real-world examples of a similarly low R^2 given in genuine research? It would be worth mentioning their existence if we can find one. [[User:Cosmogoblin\|Cosmogoblin]] ([[User talk:Cosmogoblin\|talk]]) 18:03, 28 August 2016 (UTC)

@@ Line 11: / Line 11: @@
 : Oops, misread it!  I read "insignificant" as "significant". [[User:Djbrasier|Djbrasier]] ([[User talk:Djbrasier|talk]]) 21:00, 26 August 2016 (UTC)
-The teapot mention may just be a joke, not a reference.
+The teapot mention may just be a joke, not a reference. {{unsigned ip|141.101.98.114}}
-== did someone check if it really was a Rsquared of 0,06? ==
+did someone check if it really was a Rsquared of 0,06?[[Special:Contributions/141.101.104.67|141.101.104.67]] 20:56, 27 August 2016 (UTC)