Corlett, P.R., Mollick, J.A. & Kober, H. Meta-analysis of human prediction error for incentives, perception, cognition, and action. Neuropsychopharmacol. (2022).

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41386-021-01264-3

URL: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41386-021-01264-3

Hello! I am getting into a Survey Research for doing satisfaction research. I am kindly asking for a help with my situation. I am advanced "tech user" with "101 university statistics" knowledge, willing to learn.

I need to deliver custom surveys to a customers, that would be super accessible with great experience (for example I like Typeform), and then I need to do some basic, but surprisingly not accessible data visualizations for gaining insights and presentations (for example standard SPSS stuff like error bars, scatterplots).

I am unable to find any service, that would have both functionalities. Do I need buy both survey software like Typeform and SPSS, and doing all the exports and imports, or is there something integrated? If not, would you recommend going SPSS or is there something more accessible for not-that-expert statistician?

All I need is visualizations, and perhaps statistical significances between two identical surveys (like before and after). Subscription based software preferred, but not necessary.

Thank you in advance.

I have conducted an experiment with the purpose to determine the acid dissociation constant of creatine monohydrate through analysis of the pH curves read by a pH electrode. The methodology and analysis of the experiment are as follows (it’s kind of a lot so bear with me):

Creatine monohydrate powder will be dissolved in a 10cm^(3) solution of 0.1M HCl with a few drops of phenolphthalein indicator and titrated with 0.1M NaOH. A pH probe monitors the change in pH which will be used to determine the neuralization and half neutralization points. With reference to the Henderson Hasselbalch equation, the pH at the half equivalence points is the pKa of the amino acid.

Now that the methodology is clear, this is how I calculated the propagation of error. The table below shows the data collected in the experiment:

>Is the uncertainty is the average mass of creatine also 0.001g? since (3*(0.001))/3 = 0.001

The uncertainty of the neutralization volume should be 0.020ml since it is the same as the uncertainty of the initial volume read from the burrete but to calculate the uncertainty value of the average volume:

>do I take V(max)-V(min)/(number of trials)=(9.830-9.810)/3 = 0.006 or is it just 0.020 as well?

Alright now digging into the ugly stuff, When we plot the data we have we get a graph that looks similar to this:

https://preview.redd.it/bx6t9isnqo681.png?width=533&format=png&auto=webp&s=91289510f045ae365f8c08bb6b8168588209af3a

The uncertainty of the pH and NaOH is easy to calculate so added errors bars are easy. The confusing part is when we create the first derivative of this graph. I know it will plot the slopes of this graph and thus the equivalence and half equivalence points will be peaks such as the graph below

https://preview.redd.it/wczx7abcro681.png?width=700&format=png&auto=webp&s=942dac37fc92b847a883da58bff50bb45e839e3a

But how do I add errors bars for this graph? For the horizontal error bars, it's simply the uncertainty of the volume of NaOH. But what about the vertical? my supervisor required me to do so and I attempted to do it but he told me it's incorrect. This is my attempt: 📷

my rationale is that since the derivative of pH and derivative of Volume is divided then I should add the relative unc

Anyone else has this problem? I guess it will go away on its own, but just wanted to check.

Hello!

These results are based on the data gathered to fill in the blanks for a larger project on MEs that is planned. So far we have the creation date (or year) for over 200 Mandela Effects. (If anyone else is compiling a list of these and is willing to share, please contact us!) Here, we use this data to demonstrate why it's statistically unlikely that Mandela Effects are the result of errors in memory.

Here's the idea. If Mandela Effects are created either at the moment (or moments) after you encounter the subject, then there should be no connection to the time the subject itself was created. For example, if I "misremembered" the witches chant from Shakespeare's Macbeth:

>>"Double ,double, toil and trouble"

Is there any connection to the fact that it was published in 1606? Does the fact that my friend who shares this ME yet saw it 2 years before me change that date? Hypothetically, if one publishing company made a mistake (Like printing "B"s instead of "D"s) that people claim is the cause of the propagation of this Mandela Effect, could that affect what year Macbeth was written? I don't think so.

#In other words, we believe there is no mechanism available to your memory that would allow for any kind of "selection" to occur which could possibly affect or be influenced by the date the subject was created.

Try any example and variation you want, but I haven't been able to come up with a possible connection. If you do, please share it. But first, to isolate the subject even more, use only the last digit of the year it was created. Why? Presumably, if Mandela Effects are related to memory, then anything in living memory would be affected by this bias. So things from the 60s or 70s or 80s or 90s or 00s would have a disproportionate presence. Even more so for the 1900s! (Possibly 1800s if you're blessed with extreme longevity. To your health!) Anyway, the point is, I don't believe there's a possible connection that can be drawn from Mandela Effects being due to errors in memory and the last digit of the year the targeted subject was created.

#So the null hypothesis here is that the last resulting digit of the creation year, 0 to 9, should be evenly distributed among the group.

To demonstrate this, I'll provide some controls and identify factors that could throw this off.

First, we removed anything extremely old, i.e. anything that ends in "BC". Otherwise, the 0's would be over represented since those dates are all estimat

Or is it part of MSc in math (or physics, mechanics etc. where non-linear system are used in practise)?

Thanks

How do you write T = 1.25578 s ± 0.1247 s keeping one significant digit in the error?

My guess would be T= 1s ± 0.1 s but the number of decimal places don't match.

I am running a thermal simulation analysis in ABAQUS with the convergence error "Too many increments made for this step".

Assuming that I have to maintain the actual mesh, is it better to increase the number of increments or the size of increment (minInc)? Also, should deltmx be closer to 0 or 1?

Thank you

Be aware, we are tracking a number of cases where a DSM Common issue from the 20 July 2021 auto update is causing thread exceptions for certain DSMs on QRadar 7.4.x versions. These errors can occur when Traffic Analysis (TA) is enabled and events can route to store due to thread exceptions in ECS-EC for the Event Parser. Development is working on an updated jar file to resolve this issue, but wanted to post a link to the flash notice for this issue. If there are questions, let me know. The resolution to this issue will require a software RPM or jar to officially resolve. Attempting to uninstall the DSM Common RPM if you are on QRadar 7.4.x does not resolve the problem, but everyone can review to see if events are being routed to storage on their appliance or confirm if you are hitting this issue.

Documentation

• QRadar: Overview of auto update issue for 20 July 2021 (IJ33892)
• QRadar 7.4.x: Auto update 20 July 2021 and traffic analysis errors for DSM Common RPM

RPM that introduced the issue:

• DSMCommon-7.4-20210624145517.noarch.rpm

UPDATE

Auto Update servers and IBM Fix Central have files posted to resolve this issue. See the latest version of the flash notice for details (latest version date July 22 @ 9:30PM EDT).

You can also use this command to help determine if you experienced the auto update issue:select count(*) from events where devicetype = 147 and utf8(payload) like '%Exception was uncaught in thread%Event Parser%' last 3 DAYS

I am doing a lab report, something to do with viscosity. I watered down my equation to something manageable, below is my equation.

My equation

This is the error which I have derived, but I have a feeling that it's wrong, it can't be this simple.

My derived error

If someone has an input, please do help.

I was trying to add this part into my assembly, and then trying to create internal analysis for air rotation. But when I finish the create wizard dialog I get this error "Fluid volume recognition has failed because the model currently is not water tight..." I tried to create the part again and still not working if I hit yes then it open lids tool and closes the entire hole in the middle which I need to be open. any suggestions on what to do? and how to fix it?

https://preview.redd.it/lly6xpqjs4g71.jpg?width=776&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=091c4c7567c05b26a18c57d1296c4264d7e27e2a

https://preview.redd.it/nwtdcuqjs4g71.jpg?width=795&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=a97a941eeadb2c85205071d5b32e9e5673648cbd

Hello Everyone,

I haven't done a lot of error analysis in my life, and quite honestly I didn't pay that close of attention to it in school. I'm hoping y'all could give me a nudge in the right direction. Here's a quick outline of a problem I'm having (and how I've attempted to solve it).

The Setup:

I have a system in which the concentration of a solubilized gas in a liquid must be known and within a specified range. I have an instrument that allows me to sample the liquid, then test the headspace pressure and temperature. After obtaining those values, I can then use the manufacturer's chart to find the amount of gas in the liquid (this is the "black box").

The Problems:

Sometimes, the gas concentration is only off by a fractional amount and the reading is taken for face value. If I understand the error of my instrument, then I can reason that even if my value is slightly off I am still within range for the specification.

The chart shows values for increments of 1 psi and 1 degree F. This creates user error when one attempts to bilinearly interpolate. (The pressure gauge has marks for 0.5 psi, the thermometer has marks for 0.5 F)

In addition, upper management (who are lacking in understanding of the process) has specified unnecessarily narrow ranges that I would like to refute with some basic analysis.

My Solution:

I started by emailing the manufacturer- they didn't give me an answer as to how error propagates through the chart, but they gave me the error of the pressure gauge and thermometer: both 1% at the ranges that I typically use. Another note: I'm guessing that whatever equation they use is proprietary, so doing an actual error propagation analysis on that is off the table.

Here's the analysis I've done so far.

1. I set up a bilinear interpolation tool in excel to calculate what gas concentration reading I would actually be getting (approximately) for values between what the chart provides, such that f(P,T) = C
2. I then went through every scenario for a 1% error, 8 possibilities: f(+/- 1% P, +/- 1% T) = C
3. With all of the data for the eight possibilities, I calculated the standard deviation and then the 95% confidence interval (2 standard deviations). I plan on using the 95% confidence interval as my acceptable range.

I'd love to hear some input from someone who is more versed in this type of analysis. Cheers.

Hopefully not violating the rules. I think this is somehow important so I make a different post.

Originally, in Child Ranzal's Analysis, I thought the CRT% cap only applied to buff, but it turns out that it ALSO APPLIES TO PASSIVES.

Corresponding changes (recommended builds and passive description) have been made.

Sorry for the inconvenience if any.

Hi guys,

the field of time series analysis is very interesting but for me as a beginner pretty confusing. Especially since there are lots and lots of mathematical explanations but (at least I have a hard time finding any) no explanations of the overall concept.

If you are looking at Wolds decomposition, it is saying that it guarantees the existence of a linear presentation of a time series. Its also said, that it can be hard finding this presentation though because of it getting way too complicated way too quick and that a workaround is using the conditional expectation.

Could someone maybe explain, what is meant ( in words, not mathemathical) when it is said, that the optimal forecast is used in the sense of minimizing the quadratic error??

And maybe also how this is then linked to the forecast?

If my question(s) are too unclear let me know please.

Appreciating you guys help a lot!!

Thanks :)

I keep getting error CA0001 : An unknown error occurred while running Code Analysis. when compiling my projects.

After I try to compile again the error goes away, until I try to compile again. I have no clue how to fix this and I only have this on the preview version of VS 2022 for several versions. (Currently 3.00)

Any information regarding how to fix this issue is highly appreciated

Visual studio info

Microsoft Visual Studio Enterprise 2022 Preview
Version 17.0.0 Preview 3.0
VisualStudio.17.Preview/17.0.0-pre.3.0+31606.5
Microsoft .NET Framework
Version 4.8.04084

Installed Version: Enterprise

.NET Core Debugging with WSL   1.0
.NET Core Debugging with WSL

ASP.NET and Web Tools 2019   17.0.414.6609
ASP.NET and Web Tools 2019

ASP.NET Web Frameworks and Tools 2019   17.0.414.6609
For additional information, visit https://www.asp.net/

Azure App Service Tools v3.0.0   17.0.414.6609
Azure App Service Tools v3.0.0

Azure Functions and Web Jobs Tools   17.0.414.6609
Azure Functions and Web Jobs Tools

C# Tools   4.0.0-3.21403.23+d51d1a7338e32d3a3cd1e5452665964ee8ec15df
C# components used in the IDE. Depending on your project type and settings, a different version of the compiler may be used.

Common Azure Tools   1.10
Provides common services for use by Azure Mobile Services and Microsoft Azure Tools.

Microsoft Azure Tools for Visual Studio   2.9
Support for Azure Cloud Services projects

Microsoft JVM Debugger   1.0
Provides support for connecting the Visual Studio debugger to JDWP compatible Java Virtual Machines

Microsoft Library Manager   2.1.134+45632ee938.RR
Install client-side libraries easily to any web project

Microsoft MI-Based Debugger   1.0
Provides support for connecting Visual Studio to MI compatible debuggers

Microsoft Visual Studio Tools for Containers   1.2
Develop, run, validate your ASP.NET Core applications in the target environment. F5 your application directly into a container with debugging, or CTRL + F5 to edit & refresh your app without having to rebuild the container.

Node.js Tools   1.5.30616.1 Commit Hash:ec56570a25c831a0257261b328704fb9d210dd56
Adds support for developing and debugging Node.js apps in Visual Studio

NuGet Package Manager   6.0.0
NuGet Package Manager in Visual Studio. For more information about NuGet, visit https://docs.nuget.org/

ProjectServicesPackage Extension   1.0
ProjectServicesPackage Visual Studio Extension Detailed Info

Razor (ASP.NET Core)   17.0.0.2138002+9e71a625d64fa38b323fa6

Hello, I've been having trouble finding documentation explaining the rules that the APIC EM uses. To be specific, I've been using AlphaPrep for their video tutorials and practice tests. On the practice tests I receive I have questions such as:

Refer to the exhibit; which APIC-EM ACL analysis tool error type is this an example of?

ip access-list extended thisacl

permit tcp host 192.168.1.1 any eq www

permit tcp any host 172.16.1.1 eq www

Answer: Correlation Rule

Refer to the exhibit; which APIC-EM ACL analysis tool error type is this an example of?

ip access-list extended thisacl

permit tcp host 192.168.1.1 any eq www

permit tcp any host 172.16.1.1 eq www

Answer: Shadowed Rule

I've contacted AlphaPrep's coaching department but have been waiting 3 weeks on a response. Can anyone point out in the Official Cert Guide where this information has been gone over? Or even online. I've seen how to set up and use the APIC-EM but not what its error codes represent and why. Maybe I'm just blind or dumb? I reach out to the internet for dumb it down for me. Thanks in advance.

How do you write T = 1.25578 s ± 0.1247 s keeping one significant digit in the error?

My guess would be T= 1s ± 0.1 s but the number of decimal places don't match.

Hello!

These results are based on the data gathered to fill in the blanks for a larger project on MEs that is planned. So far we have the creation date (or year) for over 200 Mandela Effects. (If anyone else is compiling a list of these and is willing to share, please contact us!) Here, we use this data to demonstrate why it's statistically unlikely that Mandela Effects are the result of errors in memory.

Here's the idea. If Mandela Effects are created either at the moment (or moments) after you encounter the subject, then there should be no connection to the time the subject itself was created. For example, if I "misremembered" the witches chant from Shakespeare's Macbeth:

>>"Double ,double, toil and trouble"

Is there any connection to the fact that it was published in 1606? Does the fact that my friend who shares this ME yet saw it 2 years before me change that date? Hypothetically, if one publishing company made a mistake (Like printing "B"s instead of "D"s) that people claim is the cause of the propagation of this Mandela Effect, could that affect what year Macbeth was written? I don't think so.

#In other words, we believe there is no mechanism available to your memory that would allow for any kind of "selection" to occur which could possibly affect or be influenced by the date the subject was created.

Try any example and variation you want, but I haven't been able to come up with a possible connection. If you do, please share it. But first, to isolate the subject even more, use only the last digit of the year it was created. Why? Presumably, if Mandela Effects are related to memory, then anything in living memory would be affected by this bias. So things from the 60s or 70s or 80s or 90s or 00s would have a disproportionate presence. Even more so for the 1900s! (Possibly 1800s if you're blessed with extreme longevity. To your health!) Anyway, the point is, I don't believe there's a possible connection that can be drawn from Mandela Effects being due to errors in memory and the last digit of the year the targeted subject was created.

#So the null hypothesis here is that the last resulting digit of the creation year, 0 to 9, should be evenly distributed among the group.

To demonstrate this, I'll provide some controls and identify factors that could throw this off.

First, we removed anything extremely old, i.e. anything that ends in "BC". Otherwise, the 0's would be over represented since those dates are all estimat