s2 Sample Hyp Test PDF
s2 Sample Hyp Test PDF
s2 Sample Hyp Test PDF
(b) a statistic.
(1)
A researcher took a sample of 100 voters from a certain town and asked them who they would
vote for in an election. The proportion who said they would vote for Dr Smith was 35%.
(c) State the population and the statistic in this case.
(2)
(d) Explain what you understand by the sampling distribution of this statistic.
(1)
(Total 5 marks)
2. A bag contains a large number of coins. It contains only 1p and 2p coins in the ratio 1:3
(a) Find the mean μ and the variance σ2 of the values of this population of coins.
(3)
(c) Find the sampling distribution of the mean value of the samples.
(6)
(Total 11 marks)
(c) State, giving a reason which of the following is not a statistic based on this sample.
Xi –
2
n
( X i – X )2 n n
(i)
i 1 n
(ii)
(iii) X i
2
i l i l
(2)
(Total 5 marks)
(c) Suggest a suitable sampling frame from which to obtain this sample.
(1)
6. A bag contains a large number of coins. Half of them are 1p coins, one third are 2p coins and
the remainder are 5p coins.
(a) Find the mean and variance of the value of the coins.
(4)
(c) Find the sampling distribution of the mean value of these samples.
(6)
(Total 13 marks)
8. (a) Explain what you understand by (i) a population and (ii) a sampling frame.
(2)
The population and the sampling frame may not be the same.
(b) Explain why this might be the case.
(1)
(c) Give an example, justifying your choices, to illustrate when you might use
(i) a census,
(ii) a sample.
(4)
(Total 7 marks)
(b) a statistic.
(2)
(Total 3 marks)
10. A large dental practice wishes to investigate the level of satisfaction of its patients.
(a) Suggest a suitable sampling frame for the investigation.
(1)
(c) State one advantage and one disadvantage of using a sample survey rather than a census.
(2)
(d) Suggest a problem that might arise with the sampling frame when selecting patients.
(1)
(Total 5 marks)
(b) Specify a suitable sampling frame and explain how such a sample could be taken.
(2)
The coach assumes that P(A = 2) = 1 , and is therefore surprised to find that 20 of the 36
3
competitors in the sample achieved their greatest distance on their second attempt.
1
Using a suitable approximation, and assuming that P(A = 2) = 3
,
(c) find the probability that at least 20 of the competitors achieved their greatest distance on
their second attempt.
(6)
1
(d) Comment on the assumption that P(A = 2) = 3
.
(2)
(Total 11 marks)
13. A company has a large number of regular users logging onto its website. On average 4 users
every hour fail to connect to the company’s website at their first attempt.
(a) Explain why the Poisson distribution may be a suitable model in this case.
(1)
14. A company claims that a quarter of the bolts sent to them are faulty. To test this claim the
number of faulty bolts in a random sample of 50 is recorded.
(a) Give two reasons why a binomial distribution may be a suitable model for the number of
faulty bolts in the sample.
(2)
(b) Using a 5% significance level, find the critical region for a two-tailed test of the
1
hypothesis that the probability of a bolt being faulty is . The probability of rejection in
4
either tail should be as close as possible to 0.025
(3)
The machine making the bolts was reset and another sample of 50 bolts was taken. Only 5 were
found to be faulty.
(e) Test at the 1% level of significance whether or not the probability of a faulty bolt has
decreased. State your hypotheses clearly.
(6)
(Total 15 marks)
A discrete random variable x has a Binomial distribution B(30, p). A single observation is used
to test H0 : p = 0.3 against H1 : p ≠ 0.3
(b) Using a 1% level of significance find the critical region of this test. You should state the
probability of rejection in each tail which should be as close as possible to 0.005
(5)
16. An effect of a certain disease is that a small number of the red blood cells are deformed. Emily
has this disease and the deformed blood cells occur randomly at a rate of 2.5 per ml of her
blood. Following a course of treatment, a random sample of 2 ml of Emily’s blood is found to
contain only 1 deformed red blood cell.
Stating your hypotheses clearly and using a 5% level of significance, test whether or not there
has been a decrease in the number of deformed red blood cells in Emily’s blood.
(Total 6 marks)
17. Past records suggest that 30% of customers who buy baked beans from a large supermarket buy
them in single tins. A new manager questions whether or not there has been a change in the
proportion of customers who buy baked beans in single tins. A random sample of 20 customers
who had bought baked beans was taken.
(a) Using a 10% level of significance, find the critical region for a two-tailed test to answer
the manager’s question. You should state the probability of rejection in each tail which
should be less than 0.05.
(5)
The manager found that 11 customers from the sample of 20 had bought baked beans in single
tins.
(c) Comment on this finding in the light of your critical region found in part (a).
(2)
(Total 8 marks)
19. A web server is visited on weekdays, at a rate of 7 visits per minute. In a random one minute on
a Saturday the web server is visited 10 times.
(a) (i) Test, at the 10% level of significance, whether or not there is evidence that the rate
of visits is greater on a Saturday than on weekdays. State your hypotheses clearly.
(ii) State the minimum number of visits required to obtain a significant result.
(7)
In a random two minute period on a Saturday the web server is visited 20 times.
(c) Using a suitable approximation, test at the 10% level of significance, whether or not the
rate of visits is greater on a Saturday.
(6)
(Total 14 marks)
(b) State the probability of incorrectly rejecting H0 using this critical region.
(2)
(Total 5 marks)
21. Dhriti grows tomatoes. Over a period of time, she has found that there is a probability 0.3 of a
ripe tomato having a diameter greater than 4 cm. She decides to try a new fertiliser. In a random
sample of 40 ripe tomatoes, 18 have a diameter greater than 4 cm. Dhriti claims that the new
fertiliser has increased the probability of a ripe tomato being greater than 4 cm in diameter.
Test Dhriti’s claim at the 5% level of significance. State your hypotheses clearly.
(Total 7 marks)
(c) Write down the actual significance level of the above test.
(1)
23. Bacteria are randomly distributed in a river at a rate of 5 per litre of water. A new factory opens
and a scientist claims it is polluting the river with bacteria. He takes a sample of 0.5 litres of
water from the river near the factory and finds that it contains 7 bacteria. Stating your
hypotheses clearly test, at the 5% level of significance, the claim of the scientist.
(Total 7 marks)
24. Linda regularly takes a taxi to work five times a week. Over a long period of time she finds the
taxi is late once a week. The taxi firm changes her driver and Linda thinks the taxi is late more
often. In the first week, with the new driver, the taxi is late 3 times.
You may assume that the number of times a taxi is late in a week has a Binomial distribution.
Test, at the 5% level of significance, whether or not there is evidence of an increase in the
proportion of times the taxi is late. State your hypotheses clearly.
(Total 7 marks)
The manager of the supermarket thinks that the probability of a person buying a gigantic
chocolate bar is only 0.02. To test whether this hypothesis is true the manager decides to take a
random sample of 200 people who bought chocolate bars.
(b) Find the critical region that would enable the manager to test whether or not there is
evidence that the probability is different from 0.02. The probability of each tail should be
as close to 2.5% as possible.
(6)
26. Breakdowns occur on a particular machine at random at a mean rate of 1.25 per week.
(a) Find the probability that fewer than 3 breakdowns occurred in a randomly chosen week.
(4)
Over a 4 week period the machine was monitored. During this time there were 11 breakdowns.
(b) Test, at the 5% level of significance, whether or not there is evidence that the rate of
breakdowns has changed over this period. State your hypotheses clearly.
(7)
(Total 11 marks)
27. It is known from past records that 1 in 5 bowls produced in a pottery have minor defects. To
monitor production a random sample of 25 bowls was taken and the number of such bowls with
defects was recorded.
At a later date, a random sample of 20 bowls was taken and 2 of them were found to have
defects.
(c) Test, at the 10% level of significance, whether or not there is evidence that the proportion
of bowls with defects has decreased. State your hypotheses clearly.
(7)
(Total 14 marks)
28. A teacher thinks that 20% of the pupils in a school read the Deano comic regularly.
He chooses 20 pupils at random and finds 9 of them read Deano.
(a) (i) Test, at the 5% level of significance, whether or not there is evidence that the
percentage of pupils that read Deano is different from 20%. State your hypotheses
clearly.
(ii) State all the possible numbers of pupils that read Deano from a sample of size 20
that will make the test in part (a)(i) significant at the 5% level.
(9)
The teacher takes another 4 random samples of size 20 and they contain 1, 3, 1 and 4 pupils that
read Deano.
(b) By combining all 5 samples and using a suitable approximation test, at the 5% level of
significance, whether or not this provides evidence that the percentage of pupils in the
school that read Deano is different from 20%.
(8)
(c) Comment on your results for the tests in part (a) and part (b).
(2)
(Total 19 marks)
It is claimed that 10% of students can tell the difference between two brands of baked beans. In
a random sample of 250 students, 40 of them were able to distinguish the difference between the
two brands.
(b) Using a normal approximation, test at the 1% level of significance whether or not the
claim is justified. Use a one-tailed test.
(6)
(c) Comment on the acceptability of the assumptions you needed to carry out the test.
(2)
(Total 10 marks)
30. Over a long period of time, accidents happened on a stretch of road at random at a rate of 3 per
month.
Find the probability that
(a) in a randomly chosen month, more than 4 accidents occurred,
(3)
At a later date, a speed restriction was introduced on this stretch of road. During a randomly
chosen month only one accident occurred.
(c) Test, at the 5% level of significance, whether or not there is evidence to support the claim
that this speed restriction reduced the mean number of road accidents occurring per
month.
(4)
31. Brad planted 25 seeds in his greenhouse. He has read in a gardening book that the probability of
one of these seeds germinating is 0.25. Ten of Brad’s seeds germinated. He claimed that the
gardening book had underestimated this probability. Test, at the 5% level of significance,
Brad’s claim. State your hypotheses clearly.
(Total 7 marks)
32. (a) Explain what you understand by a critical region of a test statistic.
(2)
The number of breakdowns per day in a large fleet of hire cars has a Poisson distribution with
1
mean .
7
(b) Find the probability that on a particular day there are fewer than 2 breakdowns.
(3)
(c) Find the probability that during a 14-day period there are at most 4 breakdowns.
(3)
The cars are maintained at a garage. The garage introduced a weekly check to try to decrease the
number of cars that break down. In a randomly selected 28-day period after the checks are
introduced, only 1 hire car broke down.
(d) Test, at the 5% level of significance, whether or not the mean number of breakdowns has
decreased. State your hypotheses clearly.
(7)
(Total 15 marks)
After the introduction of a roundabout some distance away from this point it is suggested that
the number of vehicles passing it has decreased. During a randomly selected 10 minute interval
4 vehicles pass the point.
(d) Test, at the 5% level of significance, whether or not there is evidence to support the
suggestion that the number of vehicles has decreased. State your hypotheses clearly.
(6)
(Total 13 marks)
34. From past records a manufacturer of ceramic plant pots knows that 20% of them will have
defects. To monitor the production process, a random sample of 25 pots is checked each day
and the number of pots with defects is recorded.
(a) Find the critical regions for a two-tailed test of the hypothesis that the probability that a
plant pot has defects is 0.20. The probability of rejection in either tail should be as close
as possible to 2.5%.
(5)
35. A single observation x is to be taken from a Poisson distribution with parameter . This
observation is to be used to test H0 : = 7 against H1 : 7.
(a) Using a 5% significance level, find the critical region for this test assuming that the
probability of rejecting in either tail is as close as possible to 2.5%.
(5)
(b) Write down the significance level of this test.
(1)
The actual value of x obtained was 5.
(c) State a conclusion that can be drawn based on this value.
(2)
(Total 8 marks)
36. From past records a manufacturer of glass vases knows that 15% of the production have slight
defects. To monitor the production, a random sample of 20 vases is checked each day and the
number of vases with slight defects is recorded.
(a) Using a 5% significance level, find the critical regions for a two-tailed test of the
hypothesis that the probability of a vase with slight defects is 0.15. The probability of
rejecting, in either tail, should be as close as possible to 2.5%.
(5)
(b) State the actual significance level of the test described in part (a).
(1)
A shop sells these vases at a rate of 2.5 per week. In the 4 weeks of December the shop sold 15
vases.
(c) Stating your hypotheses clearly test, at the 5% level of significance, whether or not
there is evidence that the rate of sales per week had increased in December.
(6)
(Total 12 marks)
MARK SCHEME
1. (a) A population is collection of all items B1 1
Note
B1 – collection/group all items – need to have /imply all eg
entire/complete/every
x 1p 2p
P(X = x) 1 3
4 4
1 3 7 3
1 2 or 1 or 1.75 B1
4 4 4 4
2
1 3 7
2 12 22 – M1
4 4 4
3
= or 0.1875 A1 3
16
Note
B1 1.75 oe
M1 for using x p –
2 2
A1 0.1875 oe
(c)
x 1 4 5 2
3 3
P( X x ) 1
4
14 14 1
64
3 14 14 34 9
64
3 14 34 34 27
64
3
4
34 34 27
64
B1 M1 A1 M1 A1A1 6
6. (a)
X 1 2 5
P(X = x) 1 1 1
2 3 6
Variance = 12 × 1 + 22 × 1 + 52 × 1 – 22 = 2 or 0.0002 M A1 4
2 3 6
(c) All possible samples are chosen from a population; the values of B1 B1 2
a statistic and the associated probabilities is a sampling distribution
[4]
OR
(c) (i) Definition of census by example B1
(ii) Definition of sample by example B1
1
(c) X = no. of competitors with A = 2 X ~ B(36, 3
)
X ~N(12, 8) M1 A1
19.5 12
P(X 20) P Z 12 , ‘z’ M1 M1
8
= P(Z 2.65…) A1
= 1 – 0.9960 = 0.004 A1 6
1
(d) Probability is very low, so assumption of P(A = 2) = 3
is unlikely. B1 B1 2
(Suggests P(A = 2) might be higher.)
[11]
(b) Po (8) B1
Note
B1 Writing or using Po(8) in (i) or (ii)
Note
B1 both hypotheses correct. Must use λ or μ
M1 identifying normal
A1 using or seeing mean and variance of 48
These first two marks may be given if the following are seen in the
standardisation formula : 48 and 48 or awrt 6.93
M1 for attempting a continuity correction (Method 1: 60 ± 0.5 /
Method 2: x ± 0.5)
M1 for standardising using their mean and their standard deviation and
using either Method 1 [59.5, 60 or 60.5. accept ± z.] Method 2 [(x ± 0.5)
and equal to a ± z value)
59 .5 – 48 x – 0.5 – 48
A1 correct z value awrt ±1.66 or ± , or 1.6449
48 48
A1 awrt 3 sig fig in range 0.0484 – 0.0485, awrt 59.9
M1 for “reject H0” or “significant” maybe implied by “correct
contextual comment”
If one tail hypotheses given follow through “their prob”
and 0.05, p < 0.5
If two tail hypotheses given follow through “their prob”
with 0.025, p < 0.5
If one tail hypotheses given follow through “their prob”
and 0.95, p > 0.5
If two tail hypotheses given follow through “their prob”
with 0.975, p > 0.5
If no H1 given they get M0
A1 ft correct contextual statement followed through from their prob and
H1. need the words number of failed connections/log ons has increased o.e.
Allow “there are more failed connections”
NB A correct contextual statement alone followed through
from their prob and H1 gets M1 A1
[15]
15. (a) The set of values of the test statistic for which B1
the null hypothesis is rejected in a hypothesis test. B1 2
Note
1st B1 for “values/ numbers”
2nd B1 for “reject the null hypothesis” o.e or
the test is significant
(b) X ~ B(30,0.3) M1
P(X 3) = 0.0093
P(X 2) = 0.0021 A1
P(X 16) = 1 – 0.9936 = 0.0064
P(X 17) = 1 – 0.9979 = 0.0021 A1
Critical region is (0 )x ≤ 2 or 16 x( 30) A1A1 5
(ii) X = 11 B1 7
M1 for using Po (9) – other values you might see which imply
Po (9) are 0.0550, 0.0415, 0.9780, 0.9585, 0.9889, 0.0111,0.0062
or may be assumed by at least one correct region.
A1 for X 3 or X < 4 condone c1 or CR instead of X
A1 for X 16 or X > 15
They must identify the critical regions at the end and not just have
them as part of their working. Do not accept P(X 3) etc gets A0
if they use 0.0212 and 0.0220 they can gain these marks regardless
of the critical regions in part a. If they have not got the correct
numbers they must be adding the values for their critical regions.
(both smaller than 0.05)
You may need to look these up. The most common table values
for lambda = 9 are in this table
x 2 3 4 5 14 15 16 17 18
0.0062 0.0212 0.0550 0.1157 0.9585 0.9780 0.9889 0.9947 0.9976
(ii) The critical region is the range of values or a test statistic B1g
or region where the test is significant
that would lead to the rejection of H0. B1h 3
B1 range of values. This may be implied by other words.
Not region on its own
B1 which lead you to reject H0
Give the first B1 if only one mark awarded.
Method 2
H0: = 5 ( = 2.5) may use or B1
H1: > 5 ( > 2.5) B1
X ~ Po (2.5) may be implied M1
P(X < 7) [P(X < 5) = 0.8912] att P(X < 7) P(X < 6)
P(X < 6) = 0.9580 M1A1
= 0.9858 CR X 6 wrt 0.986
0.9858 > 0.95 7 6 or 7 is in critical region or 7 is significant M1
(Reject H0.) There is significant evidence at the 5% significance level that B1
the factory is polluting the river with bacteria.
or
The scientists claim is justified
Method 2
H0: = 5 ( = 2.5) may use or B1
H1: 5 ( 2.5) B0
X ~ Po (2.5) M1
P(X < 7) [P(X < 6) = 0.9580] att P(X < 7) P(X < 7)
P(X < 7) = 0.9858 M1A1
= 0.9858 CR X 7 awrt 0.986
0.9858 > 0.975 7 7 or 7 is in critical region or 7 is significant M1
(Reject H0.) There is significant evidence at the 5% significance level that B1
the factory is polluting the river with bacteria.
or
The scientists claim is justified
[7]
Method 2
H0: p = 0.2 B1
H1: p > 0.2 B1
X ~ B(5, 0.2) may be implied M1
P(X < 3) = [P(X < 3) = 0.9421] att P(X < 3) P(X < 4)
P(X < 4) = 0.9933
0.9421 CR X 4 awrt 0.942 M1A1
0.9421 < 0.95 3 4 or 3 is not in critical region or 3 is not M1
significant
(Do not reject H0.) There is insufficient evidence at the 5% significance B1
level that there is an increase in the number of times the taxi/driver is late.
or
Linda’s claim is not justified
Method 2
H0: p = 0.2 B1
H1: p 0.2 B0
X ~ X ~ B(5, 0.2) may be implied M1
P(X < 3) = [P(X < 3) = 0.9421] att P(X < 3) P(X < 4)
P(X < 4) = 0.9933
0.9421 CR X 4 awrt 0.942 M1A1
0.9421 < 0.975 3 4 or 3 is not in critical region or 3 is not M1
significant
(Do not reject H0.) There is insufficient evidence at the 5% significance B1
level that there is an increase in the number of times the taxi/driver is late.
or
Linda’s claim is not justified
Special Case
1
If they use a probability of throughout the question they may gain
7
B1B1M0M1A0M1B1.
1
NB they must attempt to work out the probabilities using
7
[7]
27. (a) Let X represent the number of bowls with minor defects.
X B; (25, 0.20) B1; B1
may be implied
CR is {X 1 X 10} A1 6
P(Y 1) = 0.0692
= 0.2061 CR Y 1 A1
0.2061 > 0.10 or 0.7939 < 0.9 or 2>1 M1
their p
Insufficient evidence to suggest that the proportion of Blft 7
defective bowls has decreased.
[14]
x( 1 ) 20
P(X 18) = P(Z 18 .5 20 ) or 2 = 1.96
4 4
cc, standardise or use z value, standardise M1 M1 A1
= P(Z –0.375)
= 0.352 – 0.354 CR X < 12.16 or 11.66 for ½ A1
[0.352 > 0.025 or 18 > 12.16 therefore insufficient evidence to reject H0
Combined numbers of Deano readers suggests 20% of pupils
read Deano A1 8
Aliter (d)
p = 0.0262 < 0.05
AWRT 0.026 equn to –1.6449
[16]
32. (a) A range of values of a test statistic such that if a value of the test statistic
obtained from a particular sample lies in the critical region,
then the null hypothesis is rejected (or equivalent). B1B1 2
34. (a) Let X represent the number of plant pots with defects, X ~ B(25,0.20) B1
Implied
P(X 1) = 0.0274, P(X 10) = 0.0173 M1A1A1
Clear attempt at both tails required, 4dp
Critical region is X 1, X 10 A1 5
(c) H0: = 10, H1: > 10 (or H0: = 60, H1: > 60) B1B1
Let Y represent the number sold in 6 weeks, under H0, Y ~ Po(60)
P(Y 74) P(W > 73.5) where W ~ N(60,60) M1A1
0.5 for cc, 73.5
73.5 60
P(Z ) = P(Z > 1.74) =, 0.047 – 0.0409 <0.05 M1,A1
60
Standardise using 60 60
Evidence that rate of sales per week has increased. A1ft 7
[13]
In part (c) a substantial number of candidates were confused about “the population in this case”. Many thought it to
be the sample of 100 voters. Others were closer to the truth with “all the residents of the town”, but did not earn the
mark because they had failed to distinguish between registered voters and residents. The statistic was more easily
identified.
Part (d) was poorly answered with many candidates having no idea what a sampling distribution was and those that
did being unable to put it into context. The sampling distribution of a proportion is arguably one of the hardest to get
a grip on and articulate convincingly.
2. A high proportion of candidates attempted the first two parts of this question successfully, with the majority of
candidates getting at least one mark for part (b). Those less successful in part (a) either misread the question and
ended up with a denominator of 3 for the probabilities or confused formulae for calculating the mean and variance
xp x
and used, for example, n
2 2
for the mean or used E(X ) for σ . The solution to part (c) proved beyond the
capability of a minority of candidates but, for the majority, many exemplary answers were evident, reflecting sound
preparation on this topic. Candidates who found all 8 cases in (b) usually gained four marks in part (c) for calculating
the probabilities. For a small percentage of those candidates, calculating the means was difficult and hence
completing the table correctly was not possible. A few candidates tried unsuccessfully to use the binomial to answer
part (c).
3. This question was either answered very well with some text book solutions, although it seemed that only a minority
of candidates earned all five marks, or badly with some strange descriptions. A reasonable number of candidates
responded with comments that were very close to those in the mark scheme: evidence possibly of deliberate
preparation and learning whilst others had internalised the concepts and provided responses in their own words.
Whilst these responses might not have matched the ‘official’ answers, they nevertheless captured the essence of the
concepts and were fully acceptable. There was confusion with the definition of statistics and parameters and part (b)
was often attempted badly with candidates not knowing the definition of a probability distribution. On the whole this
was one of the worst answered questions in the paper.
In part (a) candidates gave various definitions sometimes all muddled up. Not many candidates gave clear definitions
but a common error was candidates writing “any function” or “no other quantities”.
In part (b) again the candidates had mixed success. A significant minority scored marks by knowing that a sampling
distribution involved all possible values of the statistic and their associated probabilities.
In part (c) many could identify (ii) correctly and a variety of reasons were seen. This part seemed to be done well
4. Nearly all candidates achieved at least one of the available marks but it was disappointing that there were not more
attaining full marks.
(a) Too many candidates referred to the national census rather than a general definition. Some felt an
enumeration was adequate and others failed to recognise that EVERY member had to be investigated.
(b) A failure to put the question in context and consider the consequences of testing every item meant that some
candidates scored 0 in this part of the question. A few candidates did not read the question carefully and used
cheap and quick as their reasons why a census should not be used when the question specifically said give a
reason “other than to save time and cost”.
(c) Many candidates mentioned a list; database or register and so attained the available mark. However, some did
not seem to differentiate between the population and the sampling frame.
(d) Most candidates were able to identify the sampling units correctly, although those who had not scored in part
(c) tended to say: “the sample of 5 cookers” in part (d).
5. Almost all candidates answered part (a) correctly, a minority failed to mention “census” or “asking all members”
when answers referred to long time/expensive/difficult. In part (b) many candidates failed to include the word “all” in
their answer. Quite a number did not know or understand the term sampling frame and wrote about sampling
methods. Most candidates answered part (c) correctly, but there were occasional references to golfers rather than
members or to those selected in the sample.
6. In part (a) many candidates were able to calculate the mean accurately, although some divided by random constants.
Few drew up a table and many were unable to cope with the 5p coins.
The most common error in calculating the variance was the failure to subtract E(X)².
Most candidates correctly identified 6 possible samples but some failed to realise that combinations such as (1,5) and
(5,1) were different and so missed the other 3 possibilities. Only a minority of candidates were able to attempt part (c)
of the question with any success, with many candidates having no idea what was meant by ‘the sampling distribution
of the mean value of the samples’. Most did not find the mean values and if they did, then they were unable to find
the probabilities (ninths were common).Very few candidates achieved full marks.
7. This question proved difficult to many candidates. Errors in this part (a) included the use of the word sample rather
than population. Many candidates also gave an ambiguous response to part (b), often omitting to mention all
sampling units or the whole population. Part (c) was done badly and whilst some candidates scored 1 mark very few
achieved both marks. It appeared that many candidates had attempted to memorise the definition, but it came out
garbled and confused with other concepts.
8. The bookwork required to answer this question was not remembered as well as it should have been. Many candidates
could not define a population or a sampling frame in detail or know why they might be different. In part (c) many
candidates were unable to give in sufficient detail a justified example of the use of a census and a sample.
9. Weaker students had difficulties with this question with a considerable number scoring 1 or 0 marks. In part (a) good
candidates answered this correctly but for many there was confusion between a population and a sample and that the
population must be in a list or equivalent. In part (b) those candidates who had learnt the basic definitions were able
to answer this successfully.
10. Only a very few candidates achieved full marks. Most scored 2 or 3 out of the 5 available. Common errors were in
part (c) where only a very small number could provide a valid disadvantage and in part (d) not all candidates realised
the problem of having an incomplete (or not up-to-date) sampling frame.
11. This question also allowed candidates to score highly; indeed some otherwise poor papers were redeemed by good
marks here. Most marks were lost in the opening parts where it is clear that candidates do not understand well enough
the need for a degree of precision in defining terms such as population and sampling frame. Similarly it is a cause for
concern that the majority of candidates talk about a census giving more accurate answers (even though this was
allowed) rather than understanding the real differences between a sample and a census. Part (e) received a very high
13. The majority of candidates were familiar with the technical terms in part (a), but failed to establish any context.
Part (b) was a useful source of marks for a large proportion of the candidates. The only problems were occasional
errors in detail. In part (i) a few did not spot the change in time scale and used Po(4) rather than Po(8). Some were
confused by the wording and calculated P(X = 8) rather than P(X = 0). The main source of error for (ii) was to find 1
– P(X 4) instead of
1 – P(X 3).
In part (c) the Normal distribution was a well-rehearsed routine for many candidates with many candidates
concluding the question with a clear statement in context.
The main errors were
• Some other letter (or none) in place of or
• Incorrect Normal distribution: e.g. N(60, 60)
• Omission of (or an incorrect) continuity correction
• Using 48 instead of 60
• Calculation errors
A minority of candidates who used the wrong distribution (usually Poisson) were still able to earn the final two marks
in the many cases when clear working was shown. This question was generally well done with many candidates
scoring full marks.
In part (c) the majority of candidates knew what to do and just lost the accuracy mark because of errors from part (b)
carried forward.
Part (d) tested the understanding of what a critical region actually is, with candidates correctly noting that 8 was
outside the critical region but then failing to make the correct deduction from it. Some were clearly conditioned to
associate a claim with the alternative hypothesis rather than the null hypothesis. A substantial number of responses
where candidates were confident with the language of double-negatives wrote “8 is not in the critical region so there
is insufficient evidence to disprove the company’s claim”. Other candidates did not write this, but clearly understood
when they said, more simply “the company is correct”.
Part (e) was generally well done with correct deductions being made and the contextual statement being made. A few
worked out P( X 5) rather than P( X 5) .
15. Part (a) tested candidates’ understanding of the critical region of a test statistic and responses were very varied, with
many giving answers in terms of a ‘region’ or ‘area’ and making no reference to the null hypothesis or the test being
significant. Many candidates lost at least one mark in part (b), either through not showing the working to get the
probability for the upper critical value, i.e. 1 – P(X ≤ 15) = P(X ≥ 16) = 0.0064, or by not showing any results that
indicated that they had used B(30, 0.3) and just writing down the critical regions, often incorrectly. A minority of
candidates still write their critical regions in terms of probabilities and lose the final two marks. Responses in part (c)
were generally good with the majority of candidates making a comment about the observed value and their critical
16. Candidates seemed better prepared for this type of question than in previous years. Marks were often lost for not
using λ or μ in the hypotheses and for not putting the conclusion into context. A significant minority of candidates
found P(X = 1) instead of P(X≤1) but only a few candidates chose the critical region route.
17. This was a very well answered question. Candidates were able to use binomial tables and gave the answer to the
required number of decimal places. As in previous years there were some candidates who confused the critical region
with the probability of the test statistic being in that region but this error has decreased. Candidates were able to
describe the acceptance of the hypothesis in context although sometimes it would be better if they just repeated the
wording from the question which would help them avoid some of the mistakes seen. There were still a few candidates
who did not give a reason in context at all.
In part (a) many candidates failed to read this question carefully assuming it was identical to similar ones set
previously. Most candidates correctly identified B(20,0.3) to earn the method mark and many had 0.0355 written
down to earn the first A mark, although in light of their subsequent work, this may often have been accidental. A
majority of candidates did not gain the second A mark as they failed to respond to the instruction “state the
probability of rejection in each case”. In the more serious cases, candidates had shown no probabilities from the
tables, doing all their work mentally, only writing their general strategy: “P(X≤c) < 0.05”. Whilst many candidates
were able to write down the critical region using the correct notation there are still some candidates who are losing
marks they should have earned, by writing P(X ≤ 2) for the critical region X ≤ 2
Part (b) was usually correct.
Part (c) provided yet more evidence of candidates who had failed to read the question: “in the light of your critical
region”. Some candidates chose not to mention the critical region and a number of those candidates who identified
that 11 was in the critical region did not refer to the manager’s question.
18. Part (a) of this question was poorly done. Candidates would appear unfamiliar with the standard mathematical
notation for a Critical Region. Thus 11 X 2 made its usual appearances, along with c1 = 2 and P(X ≤ 2)
In part (b) candidates knew what was expected of them although many with incorrect critical regions were happy to
give a probability greater than 1 for the critical region.
Part (c) was well answered. A few candidates did contradict themselves by saying it was “significant” and “there is
no evidence to reject H0” so losing the first mark.
19. In Part (a) there are a sizeable number of candidates who are not using the correct symbols in defining their
hypotheses although the majority of candidates recognised Po(7).
For candidates who attempted a critical region there were still a number who struggled to define it correctly for a
number of reasons:
• Looking at the wrong tail and concluding X≤3.
• Incorrect use of > sign when concluding 11 - not appreciating that this means ≥12 for a discrete
variable.
• Not knowing how to use probabilities to define the region correctly and concluding 10 or 12 instead
of 11.
The candidates who opted to calculate the probability were generally more successful.
A minority still try to calculate a probability to compare with 0.9. This proved to be the most difficult route with the
majority of students unable to calculate the probability or critical region correctly. We must once again advise that
this is not the recommended way to do this question. There are still a significant number who failed to give an answer
in context although fewer than in previous sessions.
Giving the minimum number of visits needed to obtain a significant result proved challenging to some and it was
noticeable that many did not use their working from part (a) or see the connection between the answer for (i) and (ii)
and there were also number of candidates who did not recognise inconsistencies in their answers.
A number of candidates simply missed answering part (b) but those who did usually scored well.
There were many excellent responses in part (c) with a high proportion of candidates showing competence in using a
Normal approximation, finding the mean and variance and realising that a continuity correction was needed. Marks
were lost, however, for not including 20, and for not writing the conclusion in context in terms of the rate of visits
being greater. Some candidates attempted to find a critical value for X using methods from S3 but failing to use
1.2816. There were a number of candidates who calculated P(X = 20) in error.
21. The majority of candidates appeared to have coped with this question in a straightforward manner and made good
attempts at a conclusion in context, which was easily understood.
The hypotheses were stated correctly by most candidates – they seem more at ease with writing “p =” than in Q7
where λ is the parameter. Most used the correct distribution B(40, 0.3). Those who stated the correct inequality
usually also found the correct probability/critical region and thus rejected H0. The main errors were to calculate 1 –
P(X ≤ 18) or P(X = 18). Some candidates used a critical region approach but the majority calculated a probability. A
minority of candidates still attempted to find a probability to compare with 0.95. This was only successful in a few
cases and it is recommended that this method is not used. Most candidates who took this route found P(X ≤ 18) rather
than P(X ≤ 17).There were difficulties for some in expressing an accurate contextualised statement. The candidates
who used a critical region method here found it harder to explain their reasoning and made many more mistakes.
22. This question appeared to be difficult for many candidates with a large proportion achieving less than half the
available marks.
(a) The majority of candidates were unable to give an accurate description of a hypothesis test as a method of deciding
between 2 hypotheses. There were more successful definitions of a critical region but many candidates achieved only
0 or 1 of the 3 available marks. Common errors included too much re-use of the word region without any expansion
on it. Even those who could complete the rest of the question with a great deal -of success could not describe
accurately what they were actually doing.
(b) Although most of those attempting this part of the question realised that a Poisson distribution was
appropriate there was a sizeable number who used a Binomial distribution. Again, the most common problem
was in expressing and interpreting inequalities in order to identify the critical regions. Many found the correct
significance level but struggled to express the critical region correctly. Answers with 15 were common and
some candidates even decided that 4 to 15 was the CR.
(c) Those candidates that identified the correct critical regions were almost always able to state the significance
level correctly, as were some who had made errors in stating these regions. Some still gave 5% even with part
(b) correct.
(d) Candidates who had used a Binomial distribution in part (b), and many of those who had not, used p instead
of λ in stating the hypotheses and went on to obtain a Binomial probability in this part of the question. In
obtaining P(X ≤ 1) some used Po(9) from part (b) instead of Po(4.5). Most of those achieving the correct
statement (failing to reject H0) were able to place this in a suitable contextualised statement. There were some
candidates who still tried to find P(X = 1) rather than P(X < 1).
23. The majority of candidates found this question straightforward. They were most successful if they used the
probability method and compared it with 0.05. Those who attempted to use 95% were less successful and this is not a
recommended route for these tests.
Most candidates knew how to specify the hypotheses with most candidates using 2.5 rather than 5. Some candidates
used p, or did not use a letter at all, in stating their hypotheses, but most of the time they used λ. A minority found
P(X = 7) and some worked with Po(5).
If using the critical region method, not all candidates showed clearly, either their working, or a comparison with the
value of 7 and the CR X 7.
A sizeable minority of candidates failed to put their conclusion back into the given context.
Reject H0 is not sufficient.
24. There was clear evidence that candidates had been well prepared for a question on hypothesis testing with many
candidates scoring full marks on this question. Candidates who used the probability method were generally more
successful than those who used critical regions. They were less familiar with writing hypotheses for p than for the
mean and so used λ or µ instead of p. A few candidates mistakenly used a B(5, 1/7) or B(7,1/7) distribution. In a
minority of cases the final mark was lost through not writing the conclusion in context using wording from the
question.
26. Most candidates answered Part (a) correctly. A small number of candidates calculated the probability for less than or
equal to 3 although a minority thought that dividing by 0! in P(X = 0) gave zero. In part (b) carrying out the
hypothesis test was more challenging though there was clear evidence that candidates had been prepared for this type
of question. However, using p instead of λ or µ, when stating the hypotheses, was often seen and incorrectly stating
H1 as λ > 1.25 or 5 also lost marks. Many candidates calculated P(X ≤ 11) instead of looking at P(X ≥ 11). A diagram
would have helped them or the use of the phrase “a result as or more extreme than that obtained”. Those who used the
critical region approach made more errors. Some candidates correctly calculated the probability and compared it with
0.025 but were then unsure of the implications for the hypotheses. A few candidates used a 2-tailed hypothesis but
then used 0.05 rather than 0.025 in their comparison. Most candidates gave their conclusions in context.
27. Part (a) was one of the poorest answered questions in the paper. Many candidates quoted the inequalities with little or
no understanding of how to apply them and too many merely stated the critical values with no figures to back them
up and without going on to give the critical region. It was unclear in some cases whether they knew that the critical
region was the two tails rather than the central section. A few candidates used diagrams and this almost always
enabled them to give a correct solution. Many misunderstood the wording of the question and thought that one of the
tails could be slightly larger than 2.5%. Those that got Part (a) correct usually got part (b) correct, although a minority
of weaker candidates did not understand what was meant by significance level. Part (c) was well answered. Those
candidates who used the critical region approach did less well, tending to get themselves muddled. A few did not
make the correct implication at the end and too many did not state that 0.2061 > 0.10 but merely said the result was
not significant. The context for accepting/rejecting the null hypothesis was not always given.
28. In part (a)(i) the null and alternative hypotheses were stated correctly by most candidates but then many had
difficulties in either calculating the probability or obtaining the correct critical region and then comparing it to the
significance level or given value. Most of those obtaining a result were able to place this in context but not always
accurately or fully. Candidates still do not seem to realise that just saying accept or reject the hypothesis is
inadequate.
In (a)(ii) although some candidates obtained the critical regions the list of values was not always given. Many
candidates got the 9 but forgot the 0 and a minority gave a value of ≥ 9 but did not give the upper limit.
In part (b) there was a wide variety of errors in the solutions provided including using the incorrect approximation,
failing to include the original sample in the calculations, not using a continuity correction and errors in using the
normal tables. Again in this part many candidates lost the interpretation mark.
Most candidates attempting part (c) of the question noted that the results for the two hypothesis tests were different
but few suggested that either the populations were possibly not the same for the samples or that larger samples are
likely to yield better results.
29. Most candidates wrote down two other conditions associated with the binomial experiment but too many did not use
‘trials’ when referring to independence. The alternative hypothesis was often wrongly defined and far too many of
those using the normal approximation ignored the need to use the continuity correction. The conclusion needed to be
in context but many did not do this. Few candidates made any sensible attempt to answer part (c).
30. For those candidates that could interpret ‘more than 4 accidents occurred’ correctly parts (a) and (b) were a good
source of marks. Part (b) was often well answered and many candidates gained full marks. In part (c) incorrect
hypotheses and ignoring the continuity correction were the common errors coupled with poor use of the appropriate
significance test. Candidates need to have a simple algorithm at their fingertips to deal with tests of significance.
31. Most candidates were able to state the correct distribution, Bin(25, 0.25), and the hypotheses correctly. However, a
sizeable minority were unable to identify the correct test statistic. The most common error was examining P(X=10)
instead of P(X≥10).
32. In part (a) many candidates struggled to explain the concept of a critical region, although some gave a correct
33. Candidates were able to express two conditions for a Poisson distribution in context with vehicles passing by a
particular point on the road. Many candidates then answered part (b) and (c) correctly. In part (d) a majority of
candidates was able to give a full solution by either using a probability or critical region approach to their hypothesis
test.
34. Many candidates found this question difficult. A few candidates failed to look for the two tails in part (a) and, of
those that did, many chose any value that was less than 2.5% rather than the closest value. Many identified the correct
probability for the upper region, but then failed to interpret this as a correct critical region. Marks were lost by those
who failed to show which values they had extracted from the tables to obtain their results. Nearly all of those who
achieved full marks in part (a) answered part (b) correctly.
In part (c) weaker candidates had difficulty in stating hypotheses correctly and then attempted to use a Poisson
distribution with a parameter obtained from dividing 74 by 6. However, the best candidates realised that a normal
approximation was appropriate, with the most common error being an incorrect application of the continuity
correction. Most solutions were placed in context.
35. Many good candidates lost marks carelessly by failing to show detailed working, even if they arrived at the correct
critical region, and the statement of the region was often missing or stated as a probability. Some centres had
candidates who were trying to follow the book method too closely and did not demonstrate a clear understanding of
the concept of significance.