Re: question about the book and the CLT
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.
|