Just to be clear, if the new estimate was for a 4-sided polygon rather than a 6-sided, then the equation would be: 1.9559(5.6)√4 = 21.95 Is this correct? I'm trying not to confuse the √6 or √4 in the estimated shape with the sample size of 4 angles mentioned in the description. Does the sample size mean nothing here? Was it included just to distract the student? Are you saying I should ignore the sample size, accept the given deviation, and focus only on the series size for my computation? I keep wanting to "undo" something with the original sample of 4 and correct it for 6 in the new estimate, but I only actually have data for 4 measurements. I think I get the feeling the data is irrelevant, and that the given deviation is to be used for all future estimates. The only way to improve the deviation would be to get more samples -- there's nothing I can do to extrapolate it for a bigger set. Is this correct?
Just to be clear, if the new estimate was for a 4-sided
1.9559(5.6)√4 = 21.95
Is this correct? I'm trying not to confuse the √6 or √4 in the estimated shape with the
Are you saying I should ignore the sample size, accept the given deviation, and focus only on the series size for my computation? I keep wanting to "undo" something with the original sample of 4 and correct it for 6 in the new estimate, but I only actually have data for 4 measurements. I think I get the feeling the data is irrelevant, and that the given deviation is to be used for all future estimates. The only way to improve the deviation would be to get more samples -- there's nothing I can do to extrapolate it for a bigger set.
Is this correct?
Step by step
Solved in 2 steps
