From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 31989 invoked by alias); 24 Dec 2004 19:36:54 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gsl-discuss-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gsl-discuss-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 31924 invoked from network); 24 Dec 2004 19:36:47 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO punt-mx0.dmpriest.net.uk) (62.13.128.153) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 24 Dec 2004 19:36:47 -0000 Received: from squirrel.dmpriest.net.uk (secure.authsmtp.com [62.13.128.25]) by punt-mx0.dmpriest.net.uk (8.12.11/8.12.11/Kp) with ESMTP id iBOJakNm021073 for ; Fri, 24 Dec 2004 19:36:46 GMT Received: from nan.dnsalias.org ([194.117.6.229]) (authenticated bits=0) by squirrel.dmpriest.net.uk (8.13.1/8.13.1/Kp) with ESMTP id iBOJajqI001351 for ; Fri, 24 Dec 2004 19:36:45 GMT (envelope-from jgmbenoit@wanadoo.fr) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]) by nan.dnsalias.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1ChvEy-0006Py-4i for gsl-discuss@sources.redhat.com; Fri, 24 Dec 2004 19:36:44 +0000 Message-ID: <41CC6FCB.1020907@wanadoo.fr> Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 19:36:00 -0000 From: Jerome BENOIT Reply-To: jgmbenoit@wanadoo.fr Organization: none User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.9 (X11/20041124) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gsl-discuss@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: discret random distributions: test References: <41C5C6DC.5010904@wanadoo.fr> <16840.19530.535732.244729@network-theory.co.uk> <41C8594D.90707@wanadoo.fr> <16844.25861.806194.746113@network-theory.co.uk> In-Reply-To: <16844.25861.806194.746113@network-theory.co.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "nan.dnsalias.org", has identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or block similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: Thanks for the reply. Brian Gough wrote: > Jerome BENOIT writes: > > I understood the sampling part and the comparing part. > > What confuses me is the compatibility criteria. > > In particular, why the undimensionless sigma > > variable (a difference over a square root) is compare > > to a dimensionless value (a constant) ? > > The number of counts in a bin is a dimensionless quantity. > [...] Content analysis details: (0.0 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- X-Authentic-SMTP: 61633132333330.squirrel.dmpriest.net.uk:Kp X-Powered-By: AuthSMTP - http://www.authsmtp.com - Authenticated SMTP Mail Relay X-Report-SPAM: If SPAM / abuse - report it at: http://www.authsmtp.com/abuse X-Virus-Status: No virus detected - but ensure you scan with your own anti-virus system! X-SW-Source: 2004-q4/txt/msg00128.txt.bz2 Thanks for the reply. Brian Gough wrote: > Jerome BENOIT writes: > > I understood the sampling part and the comparing part. > > What confuses me is the compatibility criteria. > > In particular, why the undimensionless sigma > > variable (a difference over a square root) is compare > > to a dimensionless value (a constant) ? > > The number of counts in a bin is a dimensionless quantity. > I guess that there is a missunderstanding on my side: is there somewhere in the (classical) literature something which can clarify my understanding of the criteria ? Thanks in advance, Jerome