Timeline for Inverting a hypothesis test: nitpicky detail
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
10 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 6, 2013 at 17:45 | history | edited | gogurt | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 256 characters in body
|
| Jun 6, 2013 at 17:43 | vote | accept | gogurt | ||
| Jun 6, 2013 at 9:05 | history | edited | MånsT | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Added tag, formatting
|
| Jun 6, 2013 at 9:04 | answer | added | MånsT | timeline score: 7 | |
| Jun 5, 2013 at 22:43 | comment | added | gogurt | Yeah, you're absolutely right. But it's not defined that way in Casella and Berger. Given how classic of a text it is, I'm convinced that I'm just missing something... | |
| Jun 5, 2013 at 22:38 | comment | added | Glen_b | If you define your CI's as having at least coverage $1-\alpha$ everything works. It's often impossible to get exactly $1-\alpha$ (consider a binomial, for example - the sample is discrete so the distribution of possible values that the MLE of the continuous parameter takes is discrete). | |
| S Jun 5, 2013 at 21:27 | history | suggested | Andre Silva | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
removed acronym (first time it is stated), added tag "self-study"
|
| Jun 5, 2013 at 21:18 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| S Jun 5, 2013 at 21:27 | |||||
| Jun 5, 2013 at 20:50 | review | First posts | |||
| Jun 5, 2013 at 21:19 | |||||
| Jun 5, 2013 at 20:35 | history | asked | gogurt | CC BY-SA 3.0 |