Love the inverted bell curve scar on her forehead instead of a lightning bolt scar in the thought bubble sequence. Makes me think she was almost killed by some deranged math professor but was saved by the power of statistical analysis.
Using this playlist as a primer before diving back into the world of statistics after changing careers. This is super helpful! I especially loved the visualization of variance with the squares :)
A detailed explanation or example of how dividing the variance by n as opposed to n-1 biases the calculation would be nice. This never got explained in any of the statistics courses I've taken.
This is actually known as Bessel's correction, and it is related to the degrees of freedom in a sample. Imagine you have a sample of n independently sampled items. You can think of this as a vector with n entries. Our n-sized vector has each entry independent of each other entry, so there are n degrees of freedom in our sample. Now let's obtain n residuals by subtracting each of the entries from the sample mean. What happens? You have now initiated a constraint on this newly transformed vector! The constraint is that all of the entries now have to sum to zero, so there is one less degree of freedom! You can essentially think about Bessel's correction as a linear algebra result from placing a constraint on a finite sample by subtracting the sample mean from each entry (and thus requiring the residuals to sum to 0).
Thank you! This was pretty helpful. But I've been away from math for way too long so I'm going to spell out some more details that took me some time to work out. So for dummies like me. :) Say you have a list of 5 elements: 2, 2, 5, 8, 8 Mean of data = sum of all elements/ total number of elements = 25/5 = 5 Subtracting the mean from each value in the list: -3, -3, 0, 3, 3 Sum of all elements here = 0 -> added one constraint. The reason is, by the definition of a mean, we have [sum of all values less than the mean] = [sum of all values greater than the mean]. So the residues cancel out.
Don't think of it as dividing by the number of points, think of it as dividing by the number of pieces of information (aka degrees of freedom, but I hate that name). When you calculate the mean, you divide by n because there are that many pieces of information. When you calculate the variance, you lost a piece of information. Why is that? It's because you already calculated the mean! If I told you all of the numbers except for one, but I also gave you the mean, you would be able to figure out what that missing point is (this was actually a question I used on a test recently). So basically, you only need n-1 data points as well as the mean in order to have n pieces of information. The mean counts as that last piece of information. The standard deviation is the average deviation per piece of information. There's no good reason to divide by the number of points. The mean is the average of all of the information from each point. You want to find how much the information in your data set varies, on average (it's the average of the deviations from the mean). The amount of information left after calculating the mean is n-1. When they get to linear models, you will find a divisor of n-2 in the variance of the slope of the line. This is because the slope is based on the mean AND the variance (or, equivalently, the intercept and the residuals); you've made 2 points of information redundant. I hope that makes sense.
It comes from a theoretical reasoning. Suppose that you have a random sample, that is a set of random variable X1,...,Xn that are mutually indipendent and identically distibuted. Suppose that they have each finite mean and variance, that is the same for any Xi cause they are all identically distributed. It happnes that (sum_{k=1}^n(xk-mean)^2)/n is itself another random variable, called the variance of the sample, of which you can calculate the mean and the variance. But the mean of this new random variable is not equal to the variance of the initial distribution, but is equal to (n-1)/n times the variance of the original distribution. So one multiplies for n/(n-1) the variance of the semple for obtain a more precise estimation of the variance of the original distribution. I hope that i've been clear, althaugh it is necessary some theoretical basis to really understand it.
Amazing explanations. Really cleared up my questions about my statistics class. One small suggestion though. Could you please include the formulas to calculate Variation, Standard Deviation, etc. It would mean a lot to me. Thank You!
This is absolutely brilliant - I am a physician looking to do a PhD and my last formal maths course was at high school (shall we say 30+ years ago...). I REALLY needed to go back to basics on statistics and this course is perfect. I feel set up to attack the more specialised texts on medical stats as you have explained the principles behind the formulae... thankyou!! I have one minor point, it would have been useful to mention why you square the deviation of each data point when calculating the variance; it took my rusty brain quite a while to realise that all of the deviations above and below the mean would otherwise cancel themselves out!
I am trying to prepare for a resit exam for my statistics course which was so confusing. I want to say that this crash course is a blessing, and especially this episode which has done a marvelous job on explaining variance and deviation and more important what is the standard and why, more than my uni could. Thank you!
I've been trying to wrap my head around standard deviation for a while now and was always confused by it. This video lead me to that 'aha!' moment where I finally get it -- thank you!
I struggle a lot when I see formulas, and need to see each point in action to understand what's going on. This video did this really well. As someone else mentioned, it would maybe be nice to see the formulas alongside what step you're doing, to better allow [the viewer] to convert the logic to the math and vice versa.
This video contains an important misconception! :O Namely, that the standard deviation is the average of the deviations from the mean. Actually, because half of all deviations are negative (below the mean) and the other half are positive (above the mean), *the average of all deviations is always zero.* This is in fact why we square the deviations when calculating the variance - squares are always positive, so this gets rid of the problem. Of course, you could simply average the sizes of the deviations, disregarding the plus or minus signs. The resulting value is called the absolute mean deviation, and it's similar to the standard deviation, but *not the same*. Also, for historical and practical reasons, the absolute mean deviation is almost never used.
When calculating the mean deviation about mean and median, we just take the modulus value of the deviations. Does that mean I'm calculating the absolute mean deviation?
I think the way the explanations are orchestrated is superb... The examples and choice of words are brilliant....makes me as a viewer understand things pretty easily.
Boy do I wish reporters would give std-dev more often. I feel like they don't because they don't want to confuse people who don't know stat. I'm curious how you guys are going to do this course with minimal math. My stat classes were practically nothing but math, and I felt sorry for the kids who hadn't already taken calc...
I remember from school that there were measures akin to the standard deviation that were calculated from the 3rd power of the distance to the average and then cubic root applied to the sum. Also with the forth order. I think the name of one of them was skew :)!
In the information age and the rise of data analytics do you think it's a necessity to learn stats, or should it still be considered an optional math topic? Should it be nessesary in highschool, college, or both?
I forgot the name of the host but she's a good host. In fact, I never remember any of the hosts other than John and Hank Green, except for Stan, of course.
Could you please explain the 'kurtosis' in a sample data? N It's relation to mean and median? I liked these videos. It's proving very helpful for me to understand the subject. Thank you!
I’ve been wondering for a long time. Can someone explain why we want to average the square root instead of the absolute value of the difference? If you say variance is counter-intuitive because it’s squared and take its square root to use as standard deviation, it seems much more straight forward to average the absolute values of differences in the first place. By taking the square root, we are putting more weight on the greater differences. Even if that is our intention, square seems to be an arbitrary choice. Is there any good reason why we want to average the squared differences, take its square root and call it standard deviation to use as a measure of spread?
Can someone explain why the biased variance is corrected by subtracting the sample size by one? I mean, I understand the motive behind it, but what's the mathematical reason for doing that?
The Primeval Void See Jack Leonard's comment in this video for a full thread discussing this. I'll repost my reply here for you too "This is actually known as Bessel's correction, and it is related to the degrees of freedom in a sample. Imagine you have n samples. You can think of this as a vector with n entries. Our n-sized vector has each entry independent of each other entry, so there are n degrees of freedom in our sample. Now let's obtain n residuals by subtracting each of the samples from the sample mean. What happens? You have now initiated a constraint on this newly transformed vector! The constraint is that all of the entries now have to sum to zero, so there is one less degree of freedom! You can essentially think about Bessel's correction as a linear algebra result from placing a constraint on a finite sample by subtracting the sample mean from each entry (and thus requiring the residuals to sum to 0)."
Great explanation. I feel a little more explanation of rationale behind going for variance and standard deviation is required. Anyways I just like the course. ^^
I noticed that variance and standard deviation are both based on the mean; and so, as the video notes, they are highly affected by outliers in our data. Considering that, is there a notion of variance and standard deviation that's based on the median? So that those measures of spread wouldn't be so affected by the outliers?
Could anyone explain the mathematical reasoning behind squaring the deviation (which is also called the variance, I think) to get the squared deviation? Maybe more specifically, I don't understand what the squared deviation tells us about the spread of the data that the deviation doesn't? Many thanks in advance!
I wish they'd mentioned this in the video! It used to confuse me for years. :( Basically, the variance is an attempt to answer the question "how far is the typical data point from the mean?" But the problem is that roughly half the data is above the mean (the deviation is positive), while the other half-ish is below the mean (the deviation is negative). So the average of this series of negative and positive deviations is always simply zero. But if we square all the numbers before averaging them, they'll all be positive (-2 squared and 2 squared are both 4). That's why we compute the variance as the average of *squared* means. (Or rather the sum of squared means divided by the number of data points minus one, but whatever, if the sample size is large enough that's basically the same thing.) Of course, as mentioned in the video, we then get a sort of uninterpretable number - so we have to square root that bastard again to get the standard deviation, which is *not* actually the average deviation from the mean... but it's close enough, and makes more sense to us intuitively than the variance.
@@tsunghan_yu Yes, you can do that. The resulting statistic is called the mean deviation, and is very intuitive, but almost unused in statistical analysis. Unlike the mean deviation, variance can be manipulated in lots of useful ways, and split up into different sources, which is what ANOVA and related techniques are based on.
So a mean of 307 murders and a standard deviation of 353 murders. So around 15% of the states have -46 murders or less if it follows a normal distribution. Nice to see people getting revived so frequently!
...variance being square is like energy compared to momentum-but we don't subtract one atom to compute total energy, nor do we square-root, the energy, to calculate the standard deviation of momentum... ('hmmm') ...still, it doesn't seem like enough 'qualification' of the statistics to have only mean and variance/-deviation, like we need a sense of near:far slop; we'd also want a sense of talkup criterion how-close-to-an-elementary-statistics-function...
Wouldn't the Mode be a better point for comparison in a social scenario - mode weight, mode salary, mode height, mode IQ points etc.? A mode is more likely to give a better indication of where the social "average" is.
Can anyone explain the reason behind squaring the data points to get the variance? I understand the calculations perfectly, but why do we square it, verses, for example, cube it...etc. I have a hard time understanding mathematical concepts, so any direction is really appreciated. Thanks!
In school (in Scotland) we're told that to get standard deviation we divide by n-1 and THEN take the square root. This never made sense to me, and it's not how you explained it. Does anyone know what's going on?
hello, why do we have to use variance and standard deviation as measures for dispersion in the data as opposed to just use the sum of modulus value or absolute value of the difference between data point and mean.i.e. sum(|mean-Xi|).
I think these courses may come in handy in some 10 years when my kids reach high school years... the question is - will they understand the Harry Potter references? :P
You explained in 30 seconds the intuition behind variance. In 4 years my college professors could only regurgitate the formula to me.
KENNETH FOSTER isn't it obvious?
how the hell did you survive 4 years of college if you can't even understand something simple as the variance lmao
im so offended that you said that variance was simple and obvoius im just a kid who wants to learn math
Kudos to whoever did the background for this course. It looks great; one of my favorites yet. Edit: Kudos to Dave Freeman. Yay for end credits!
Love the inverted bell curve scar on her forehead instead of a lightning bolt scar in the thought bubble sequence. Makes me think she was almost killed by some deranged math professor but was saved by the power of statistical analysis.
lol
Using this playlist as a primer before diving back into the world of statistics after changing careers. This is super helpful! I especially loved the visualization of variance with the squares :)
A detailed explanation or example of how dividing the variance by n as opposed to n-1 biases the calculation would be nice.
This never got explained in any of the statistics courses I've taken.
"This is beyond the scope of a high school level course." (This translates to: I'm a high school AP Stats teacher, and I have no idea either.)
This is actually known as Bessel's correction, and it is related to the degrees of freedom in a sample. Imagine you have a sample of n independently sampled items. You can think of this as a vector with n entries. Our n-sized vector has each entry independent of each other entry, so there are n degrees of freedom in our sample. Now let's obtain n residuals by subtracting each of the entries from the sample mean. What happens? You have now initiated a constraint on this newly transformed vector! The constraint is that all of the entries now have to sum to zero, so there is one less degree of freedom! You can essentially think about Bessel's correction as a linear algebra result from placing a constraint on a finite sample by subtracting the sample mean from each entry (and thus requiring the residuals to sum to 0).
Thank you! This was pretty helpful. But I've been away from math for way too long so I'm going to spell out some more details that took me some time to work out.
So for dummies like me. :)
Say you have a list of 5 elements: 2, 2, 5, 8, 8
Mean of data = sum of all elements/ total number of elements = 25/5 = 5
Subtracting the mean from each value in the list: -3, -3, 0, 3, 3
Sum of all elements here = 0 -> added one constraint.
The reason is, by the definition of a mean, we have [sum of all values less than the mean] = [sum of all values greater than the mean]. So the residues cancel out.
Don't think of it as dividing by the number of points, think of it as dividing by the number of pieces of information (aka degrees of freedom, but I hate that name). When you calculate the mean, you divide by n because there are that many pieces of information. When you calculate the variance, you lost a piece of information. Why is that? It's because you already calculated the mean!
If I told you all of the numbers except for one, but I also gave you the mean, you would be able to figure out what that missing point is (this was actually a question I used on a test recently). So basically, you only need n-1 data points as well as the mean in order to have n pieces of information. The mean counts as that last piece of information. The standard deviation is the average deviation per piece of information.
There's no good reason to divide by the number of points. The mean is the average of all of the information from each point. You want to find how much the information in your data set varies, on average (it's the average of the deviations from the mean). The amount of information left after calculating the mean is n-1.
When they get to linear models, you will find a divisor of n-2 in the variance of the slope of the line. This is because the slope is based on the mean AND the variance (or, equivalently, the intercept and the residuals); you've made 2 points of information redundant.
I hope that makes sense.
It comes from a theoretical reasoning. Suppose that you have a random sample, that is a set of random variable X1,...,Xn that are mutually indipendent and identically distibuted. Suppose that they have each finite mean and variance, that is the same for any Xi cause they are all identically distributed. It happnes that (sum_{k=1}^n(xk-mean)^2)/n is itself another random variable, called the variance of the sample, of which you can calculate the mean and the variance. But the mean of this new random variable is not equal to the variance of the initial distribution, but is equal to (n-1)/n times the variance of the original distribution. So one multiplies for n/(n-1) the variance of the semple for obtain a more precise estimation of the variance of the original distribution. I hope that i've been clear, althaugh it is necessary some theoretical basis to really understand it.
Square wins makes perfect sense. You will often hear people claim that they have won fair and square.
Amazing explanations. Really cleared up my questions about my statistics class. One small suggestion though. Could you please include the formulas to calculate Variation, Standard Deviation, etc. It would mean a lot to me. Thank You!
This is absolutely brilliant - I am a physician looking to do a PhD and my last formal maths course was at high school (shall we say 30+ years ago...). I REALLY needed to go back to basics on statistics and this course is perfect. I feel set up to attack the more specialised texts on medical stats as you have explained the principles behind the formulae... thankyou!! I have one minor point, it would have been useful to mention why you square the deviation of each data point when calculating the variance; it took my rusty brain quite a while to realise that all of the deviations above and below the mean would otherwise cancel themselves out!
We started having Statistics as a subject starting last week. This series’s timing is amazing!
the best crash course video i've seen by far. thank you for putting standard deviation into perspective!
I am trying to prepare for a resit exam for my statistics course which was so confusing. I want to say that this crash course is a blessing, and especially this episode which has done a marvelous job on explaining variance and deviation and more important what is the standard and why, more than my uni could. Thank you!
I love that ending! I will no longer consider myself as part of the average!
I think of myself as one of the outliers that cause the average to change
She's a blood purist! Muggle borns can fly as well as anyone!
Although I know one example of a Muggle-born, i.e. Hermione, who doesn't like flying.
@@the.invincible.9542 And Harry was muggle raised, but not born.
@@rparl Harry had previous experiences of flying the broom ( a kid-version, although).
But yeah. It doesn't matter even if you are a muggle.
shut up you dirty blood!
I was really offended, too😩
I've been trying to wrap my head around standard deviation for a while now and was always confused by it. This video lead me to that 'aha!' moment where I finally get it -- thank you!
I struggle a lot when I see formulas, and need to see each point in action to understand what's going on. This video did this really well. As someone else mentioned, it would maybe be nice to see the formulas alongside what step you're doing, to better allow [the viewer] to convert the logic to the math and vice versa.
Phenomenal videos and narration by Adrian, certain terminology is assumed and challenging to understand but it is afterall a "Crash Course"
And never forget the standard deviation.
What about
Mean
Absolute
Deviation
Unless you're the Mongols
Totally didn't expect a statistics lesson teach me some life lesson. Thanks for your kind words!
Math is everywhere! :) Please, make the Crash Course Mathematics; it would be a pleasure to watch these series.
This video contains an important misconception! :O
Namely, that the standard deviation is the average of the deviations from the mean. Actually, because half of all deviations are negative (below the mean) and the other half are positive (above the mean), *the average of all deviations is always zero.* This is in fact why we square the deviations when calculating the variance - squares are always positive, so this gets rid of the problem.
Of course, you could simply average the sizes of the deviations, disregarding the plus or minus signs. The resulting value is called the absolute mean deviation, and it's similar to the standard deviation, but *not the same*. Also, for historical and practical reasons, the absolute mean deviation is almost never used.
what are the historical and practical reasons?
Sizes is the wrong term, absolute value of the deviations is correct english
When calculating the mean deviation about mean and median, we just take the modulus value of the deviations. Does that mean I'm calculating the absolute mean deviation?
i mean i agree when you say that the sum of deviations are zero but you know... does it really matter to how the variances are calculated?
I think the way the explanations are orchestrated is superb... The examples and choice of words are brilliant....makes me as a viewer understand things pretty easily.
Boy do I wish reporters would give std-dev more often. I feel like they don't because they don't want to confuse people who don't know stat.
I'm curious how you guys are going to do this course with minimal math. My stat classes were practically nothing but math, and I felt sorry for the kids who hadn't already taken calc...
just started university and this is really saving my butt 😅🤩 thank you so much CC team!
Was struggling with these concepts and got the hang of it in the first 4 minutes. Great explanation, thank you
Thanks for these videos! You are helping me study for my statistics exam!
I love the Madm Hoouch thought bubble example. It was very funny to see that in the video.
The idea about to comparing yourself to the average because it may not be a precise indicator is a really interesting point.
I always look forward to the creeper on the shelf
Okaaay. I gotta watch this one more time....
I love how this illustrates what Im studying. Thank you :D
I remember from school that there were measures akin to the standard deviation that were calculated from the 3rd power of the distance to the average and then cubic root applied to the sum. Also with the forth order. I think the name of one of them was skew :)!
Yep! You're thinking of the skewness (which utilizes the third moment) and the kurtosis (which utilizes the fourth moment).
Yes!
Guys just a quick note, if you're still confused about the variance and standard deviation Khan Academy has a very nice explanation for it.
In the information age and the rise of data analytics do you think it's a necessity to learn stats, or should it still be considered an optional math topic? Should it be nessesary in highschool, college, or both?
I forgot the name of the host but she's a good host. In fact, I never remember any of the hosts other than John and Hank Green, except for Stan, of course.
lol the end was hilarious. Calculate the SD too 🤪
loved the last part! thanks
Man, the joke at the end is really cool, and true as well 😄
Agreed!
This was beautifully helpful!
Thank for making feeling good with statistic course 🤭😬😜
Could you please explain the 'kurtosis' in a sample data? N It's relation to mean and median? I liked these videos. It's proving very helpful for me to understand the subject. Thank you!
Excellent video . Excellent presentation and presenter
Amazing amazing wok! May God bless you!
I’ve been wondering for a long time. Can someone explain why we want to average the square root instead of the absolute value of the difference? If you say variance is counter-intuitive because it’s squared and take its square root to use as standard deviation, it seems much more straight forward to average the absolute values of differences in the first place. By taking the square root, we are putting more weight on the greater differences. Even if that is our intention, square seems to be an arbitrary choice. Is there any good reason why we want to average the squared differences, take its square root and call it standard deviation to use as a measure of spread?
this is following my stats class almost exactly lmao
I love CrashCourse. Maybe a Biology Part 2?
This series is full of half truths for simplicity and I’m afraid this might do more n good in the long run
Cool video.Thanks Adrienne.
These videos are SO helpful! When does episode 5 publish? How many more are to come?
On average, they publish one episode per week, because sometimes they publish outtakes 😛
and usually around 40 episodes
You had me at the normal distribution studio set.
Just a big shout out to the writers as well!!!
amazing! work you guys are the best!!!!
Can someone explain why the biased variance is corrected by subtracting the sample size by one?
I mean, I understand the motive behind it, but what's the mathematical reason for doing that?
The Primeval Void See Jack Leonard's comment in this video for a full thread discussing this. I'll repost my reply here for you too
"This is actually known as Bessel's correction, and it is related to the degrees of freedom in a sample. Imagine you have n samples. You can think of this as a vector with n entries. Our n-sized vector has each entry independent of each other entry, so there are n degrees of freedom in our sample. Now let's obtain n residuals by subtracting each of the samples from the sample mean. What happens? You have now initiated a constraint on this newly transformed vector! The constraint is that all of the entries now have to sum to zero, so there is one less degree of freedom! You can essentially think about Bessel's correction as a linear algebra result from placing a constraint on a finite sample by subtracting the sample mean from each entry (and thus requiring the residuals to sum to 0)."
Grrrrr.. got into this to help me understand stock market but without background, it is seriously getting harder from this episode.
are you here for pleasure or for study. if it's for pleasure this might be a bit hard
This is lit, fam.
As a muggle-born wizard, I feel quite offended by this video.
PC MudBlood.
@Rowan Brown TELL US ABOUT HOGWARTS (or illvermorny or whatever)
I agree it's a bit offensive. But it just an example help us better understand the material.
This video was lit fam
Brilliant Video
"MADAM" Hooch. Love the reference though :D
I agree. That was a very silly one. It was fun to visualize that minus the muggle flyers.
Great explanation. I feel a little more explanation of rationale behind going for variance and standard deviation is required. Anyways I just like the course. ^^
Love the TVP Polish TV picture!
I love that Adriene Thought bubble version has thick eyebrows, resulting it be much more expressive than the others..
humblebrag on the subscribers
Pls make more on designnof experiment (DOE)
WOW, you might just have changed the way I think about Everything!
the Median calculated at 6:45 is wrong. its 40 when the outliers are included not 30. please correct me if I am wrong.
bar graft, bell curve, and pie chart used as art
I like how they had a different picture for investors and gamblers
I noticed that variance and standard deviation are both based on the mean; and so, as the video notes, they are highly affected by outliers in our data.
Considering that, is there a notion of variance and standard deviation that's based on the median? So that those measures of spread wouldn't be so affected by the outliers?
Please upload crash course on stock market
Taking Stats 1 and just I sit in class to understand pieces and come here to learn.
i love the harry potter examples they make this way more interesting lol
I am amazed. At school we are tasked to memorise equations, but Adrienne didn't need to give equations for me to understand...
Simply an awesome moral :)
Go, Adriene!
Great Videos! im loving it ! :)
when there are an odd number of values, is the median used to find Q1 and Q3?
Love this
great work for a person like me who has numerophobia
this is very good
So what you are saying is... that we should always get rid of the muggle born!!! It all make sense now!
variance=(sum((X-mean)^2)/N)
standard deviation=sqrt(variance)
Could anyone explain the mathematical reasoning behind squaring the deviation (which is also called the variance, I think) to get the squared deviation? Maybe more specifically, I don't understand what the squared deviation tells us about the spread of the data that the deviation doesn't?
Many thanks in advance!
I wish they'd mentioned this in the video! It used to confuse me for years. :(
Basically, the variance is an attempt to answer the question "how far is the typical data point from the mean?" But the problem is that roughly half the data is above the mean (the deviation is positive), while the other half-ish is below the mean (the deviation is negative). So the average of this series of negative and positive deviations is always simply zero.
But if we square all the numbers before averaging them, they'll all be positive (-2 squared and 2 squared are both 4). That's why we compute the variance as the average of *squared* means. (Or rather the sum of squared means divided by the number of data points minus one, but whatever, if the sample size is large enough that's basically the same thing.)
Of course, as mentioned in the video, we then get a sort of uninterpretable number - so we have to square root that bastard again to get the standard deviation, which is *not* actually the average deviation from the mean... but it's close enough, and makes more sense to us intuitively than the variance.
Awesome, thanks so much for the succinct and easy to follow explanation!
@@OlleLindestad why not take the absolute value of the deviation then if you just want to ensure the sum is not zero?
@@tsunghan_yu Yes, you can do that. The resulting statistic is called the mean deviation, and is very intuitive, but almost unused in statistical analysis.
Unlike the mean deviation, variance can be manipulated in lots of useful ways, and split up into different sources, which is what ANOVA and related techniques are based on.
in the basketball example, the interquartile range was closer to three in my opinion. What do you think about my opinion?
that moment when a jokes makes you absorb the information instantly hahahhha
So a mean of 307 murders and a standard deviation of 353 murders. So around 15% of the states have -46 murders or less if it follows a normal distribution. Nice to see people getting revived so frequently!
Ugh I'd love to have some peanut butter and jelly now.
Better than Mr. Green. Finally someone is..
she kept saying the 'mean' number but I kept hearing "MEME" number XD
Drkfed101 what if the mean is 420? Is the mean now a meme?
lol
1 million subs, nice.
...variance being square is like energy compared to momentum-but we don't subtract one atom to compute total energy, nor do we square-root, the energy, to calculate the standard deviation of momentum... ('hmmm') ...still, it doesn't seem like enough 'qualification' of the statistics to have only mean and variance/-deviation, like we need a sense of near:far slop; we'd also want a sense of talkup criterion how-close-to-an-elementary-statistics-function...
Wouldn't the Mode be a better point for comparison in a social scenario - mode weight, mode salary, mode height, mode IQ points etc.? A mode is more likely to give a better indication of where the social "average" is.
IQ points and Height are natural so the Mode is pretty close to the average , however salary isn't
I think the Harry Potter example is brilliant
THANKS
But why the sample variance formula is used for the team example if all the data is been used?
that muglist!!!!
Can anyone explain the reason behind squaring the data points to get the variance? I understand the calculations perfectly, but why do we square it, verses, for example, cube it...etc. I have a hard time understanding mathematical concepts, so any direction is really appreciated. Thanks!
Laura Salado it removes negatives
Thanks!
Can we get some parentheses? (-3)^2=9, but -3^2=-9.
Agreed ! Graphic needs to fixed!
In school (in Scotland) we're told that to get standard deviation we divide by n-1 and THEN take the square root. This never made sense to me, and it's not how you explained it. Does anyone know what's going on?
hello, why do we have to use variance and standard deviation as measures for dispersion in the data as opposed to just use the sum of modulus value or absolute value of the difference between data point and mean.i.e. sum(|mean-Xi|).
I think these courses may come in handy in some 10 years when my kids reach high school years... the question is - will they understand the Harry Potter references? :P
i want that bookshelf so bad