Re: question about the book and the CLT
[ QUOTE ]
On pg. 22 you define a sample as a set of observed outcomes to a particular probability distribution, e.g. for a coin flip [ 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 ].
On pg. 24 you define a sample as the summation of these outcomes; in my example 4.
That's cleary contradictory, isn't it?
The last definition should be for an aggregated sample and it's the distribution of outcomes of an aggregated sample, that follows the CLT.
[/ QUOTE ]
Yeah, I guess this isn't exactly clear. The "value of a sample" (as opposed to the value of the outcomes in a sample) should be the total value of the measured outcomes added together. THen all this stuff follows. When I get back from my trip, I'll put this in the errata.
jerrod
|