The Research on Two Test Methods of the Normal Distribution

Jin Huang Wu; Jun Sheng Wang; Yi Dong Wang; Jun Wei Lei

doi:10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMR.710.772

Paper Titles

Research on Virtual Reality Based Equipment Operation Training Simulation with GL Studio
p.755

Research on General Design of HLA Based Communication Command Equipment Operation Simulation System
p.759

Filtering of Digital Hologram
p.763

Research on the Variety Discrimination of Apple Using a Hybrid Possibilistic Clustering
p.768

The Research on Two Test Methods of the Normal Distribution
p.772

On Computer Aided Formation Framework for Composite Material
p.775

Exploring Agent-Based Modeling for Emergency Logistics Collaborative Decision Making
p.781

A Discussion about Value Management in Civil Engineering
p.786

Cost Control of the Civil Engineering Based on Activity-Based Costing
p.790

HomeAdvanced Materials ResearchAdvanced Materials Research Vol. 710The Research on Two Test Methods of the Normal...

The Research on Two Test Methods of the Normal Distribution

Abstract:

The characteristic value of the normal parent population, such as the mean, the percentile, the percentage, the standard deviation and the coefficient of variation, are often tested in engineering. The Shapiro-Wilk test and Epps-Pulley test are established in this paper to get the characteristic value of the normal parent population, which can satisfy different practical requirements.

You might also be interested in these eBooks

Advanced Technologies and Solutions in Industry

View Preview

Info:

Periodical:

Advanced Materials Research (Volume 710)

Pages:

772-774

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMR.710.772

Citation:

Cite this paper

Online since:

June 2013

Authors:

Jin Huang Wu, Jun Sheng Wang, Yi Dong Wang, Jun Wei Lei

Keywords:

Characteristic Value, Mean, Normal Distribution, Test Method

Export:

RIS, BibTeX

Price:

Permissions CCC:

Request Permissions

Permissions PLS:

Request Permissions

Сopyright:

Citation:

References

[1] Acheson J Duncan.Quality Control and Industrial Statistics. . (1986)

Google Scholar

[2] Bauer P,Bauer MM.Testing equivalence simultaneously for location and dispersion of two normally distributed population. Biometrical Journal . (1994)

DOI: 10.1002/bimj.4710360602

Google Scholar

[3] Hung HMJ,Wang SJ,Robert O'Neill.A regulatory perspective on choice of margin and inference issue in non-inferiority trials. Biomet-rical Journal . (2005)

Google Scholar

[4] Pan Zhenyu, Zhao Naiqing. The test of general distribution and multivariate normal distribution [J]. Journal of Mathematical Medicine, 2006,01:53-55.

Google Scholar

[5] Zheng Zhaobao. The generation and test for the random data of normal distribution [J]. Wuhan Institute of Surveying and mapping, 1980,01:85-92.

Google Scholar

[6] Li Xiuhai, Yu Shaowei. The droplet acquisition algorithm based on the number of normal distribution interval [J]. Journal of Shandong University ( Engineering and Technology Edition ), 2012,05:130-134.

Google Scholar

[7] Chan IS.Proving non-inferiority or equivalence of two treatment with dichotomous endpoints using exact methods. Statistical Methods in Medical Research . (2003)

DOI: 10.1191/0962280203sm314ra

Google Scholar

[8] Wang IK.Active-controlled noninferiority/equivalence trials:method and practice. Statistics in the pharmaceutical industry . (2006)

Google Scholar

[9] George A,Diamond MD,Sanjay Kaul MD.An orwellian discourse on the meaning and measurement of noninferiority. The American Journal of Cardiology . (2007)

Google Scholar

[10] Kim MY,Xue XN.Likelihood ratio and a Bayesian approach were su-perior to standard noninferiority analysis when the noninferiority margin varied with the control event rate. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology . (2004)

DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2004.05.005

Google Scholar

[11] Grieve AP.Joint equivalence of means and variances of two popula-tions. Journal of Biopharmaceutical Statistics . (1998)

Google Scholar

[12] Wiens,B.Choosing an equivalence limit for noninferiority or equivalence studies. Controlled Clinical Trials . (2002)

DOI: 10.1016/s0197-2456(01)00196-9

Google Scholar

[13] Committee for Proprietary Medicinal Products (CPMP).Points to consider on switching between superiority and non-inferiority. British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology . (2001)

DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-2125.2001.01397-3.x

Google Scholar