Graded Project AS

Problem 1

A physiotherapist with a male football team is interested in studying the relationship between
foot injuries and the positions at which the players play from the data collected

Winge Attacking Forwar Strik

Total
r Midfielder d er
145 20 24 56 45 Players Injured
Players Not
90 9 11 38 32
Injured
235 29 35 94 77 Total

1.1 What is the probability that a randomly chosen player would suffer an injury?
-The total number of players are 235.
-The total number of players Injured are 145
-The probability that a randomly chosen player would suffer an injury is 145/235= 0.62 or 62%
1.2 What is the probability that a player is a forward or a winger?
-The total number of players are 235.
-The total number of players playing as a forward are 94
-The total number of players playing as a winger are 29
-The probability that a player is a forward or a winger 0.52 or 52.34%
1.3 What is the probability that a randomly chosen player plays in a striker position and has a
foot injury?
-The total number of players which are strikers are 77
-The total number players which are striker and have injury are 45
So, the probability for player which are strikers and have foot injury are 45/77 which is 0.5844
or 58.44%
The probability that a randomly chosen player plays in a striker position and has a foot injury is
0.19
1.4 What is the probability that a randomly chosen injured player is a striker?
-The Total number of injured players are 145
-Total number of players which are injured and striker are 45
So, the probability of player chosen which are injured and is a striker is 45/145 which is 0.31 or
31%

1.5 What is the probability that a randomly chosen injured player is either a forward or an
attacking midfielder?
-The total number of injured players are 145

-Total number of players which are injured and forward and midfielder are 56 and 24
respectively.
So, the probability of players chosen injured and are forward and midfielder are (56+24)/145
which is 0.5517 or 55.17%

Problem 2
An independent research organization is trying to estimate the probability that an accident at
a nuclear power plant will result in radiation leakage. The types of accidents possible at the
plant are, fire hazards, mechanical failure, or human error. The research organization also
knows that two or more types of accidents cannot occur simultaneously.
According to the studies carried out by the organization, the probability of a radiation leak in
case of a fire is 20%, the probability of a radiation leak in case of a mechanical 50%, and the
probability of a radiation leak in case of a human error is 10%. The studies also showed the
following;

 The probability of a radiation leak occurring simultaneously with a fire is 0.1%.

 The probability of a radiation leak occurring simultaneously with a mechanical failure
is 0.15%.
 The probability of a radiation leak occurring simultaneously with a human error is
0.12%.
On the basis of the information available, answer the questions below:
GIVEN-

 The probability of a radiation leak in case of a fire is 20%,

 The probability of a radiation leak in case of a mechanical 50%,
  The probability of a radiation leak in case of a human error is 10%
 The probability of a radiation leak occurring simultaneously with a fire is 0.1%
 The probability of a radiation leak occurring simultaneously with a mechanical failure is
0.15%
 The probability of a radiation leak occurring simultaneously with a human error is 0.12
2.1 What are the probabilities of a fire, a mechanical failure, and a human error respectively?
Probability of Fire
= Probability of a radiation leak in case of a fire/probability of a radiation leak in case of a fire
= 0.10/20
=0.005

Probability of a mechanical failure

=Probability of a radiation leak in case of a Mechanical failure / probability of a radiation leak in
case of a Mechanical failure
= 0.15/50
=0.003
Probability of Human Error
probability of a radiation leak in case of a Human Error / probability of a radiation leak in case
of a Human Error
= 0.15/50
=0.012

2.2 What is the probability of a radiation leak?

Probability of a radiation leak = The probability of a radiation leak occurring simultaneously
with a fire + probability of a radiation leak occurring simultaneously with a mechanical failure +
The probability of a radiation leak occurring simultaneously with a human error
Probability of a radiation leak = 0.1+0.15+0.12 = 0.37
Probability of Radiation Leak is 0.37

2.3 Suppose there has been a radiation leak in the reactor for which the definite cause is not
known. What is the probability that it has been caused by:
  A Fire.
 A Mechanical Failure.
 A Human Error.
A-Probability that it has been caused by Fire = probability of a radiation leak in case of a
fire/Probability of a radiation leak
Probability that it has been caused by Fire = 0.1/0.37
Probability that it has been caused by Fire is 0.27

B- Probability that it has been caused by Mechanical failure = probability of a radiation leak in
case of a mechanical failure/Probability of a radiation leak
Probability that it has been caused by Mechanical failure = 0.15/0.37
Probability that it has been caused by Mechanical failure is 0.41

Problem 3:
The breaking strength of gunny bags used for packaging cement is normally distributed with a
mean of 5 kg per sq. centimeter and a standard deviation of 1.5 kg per sq. centimeter. The
quality team of the cement company wants to know the following about the packaging material
to better understand wastage or pilferage within the supply chain; Answer the questions below
based on the given information; (Provide an appropriate visual representation of your answers,
without which marks will be deducted)
Given

 Gunny bags used for packaging cement is normally distributed

 Mean is 5 kg per sq. centimeter
 Standard deviation is 1.5 kg per sq. centimeter
3.1 What proportion of the gunny bags have a breaking strength less than 3.17 kg per sq cm?
11.12% proportion of the gunny bags have a breaking strength less than 3.17 kg per sq cm
3.2 What proportion of the gunny bags have a breaking strength at least 3.6 kg per sq. cm. ?
82.45% of the gunny bags have a breaking strength at least 3.6 kg per sq cm.

3.3 What proportion of the gunny bags have a breaking strength between 5 and 5.5 kg per sq
cm.?
13.05% of gunny bags have a breaking strength between 5 and 5.5 kg per sq cm.
3.4 What proportion of the gunny bags have a breaking strength NOT between 3 and 7.5 kg
per sq cm.?
13.90% of proportion of the gunny bags have a breaking strength NOT between 3 and 7.5 kg
per sq cm.

Problem 4:
Grades of the final examination in a training course are found to be normally distributed, with a
mean of 77 and a standard deviation of 8.5. Based on the given information answer the
questions below.
GIVEN

 Grades of the final examination in a training course are found to be normally

distributed
 Mean-77
 Standard deviation-8.5
4.1 What is the probability that a randomly chosen student gets a grade below 85 on this exam?
82.66% of student gets a grade below 85 on this exam.
4.2 What is the probability that a randomly selected student scores between 65 and 87?
80.12% is the probability that a randomly selected student score between 65 and 87.
4.3 What should be the passing cut-off so that 75% of the students clear the exam?
82.73 marks is the passing cut-off so that 75% of the students clear the exam

Problem 5:
Zingaro stone printing is a company that specializes in printing images or patterns on polished
or unpolished stones. However, for the optimum level of printing of the image the stone
surface has to have a Brinell's hardness index of at least 150. Recently, Zingaro has received a
batch of polished and unpolished stones from its clients. Use the data provided to answer the
following (assuming a 5% significance level);

Load the required packages, set the working directory and load the data file.
Dataset has two variables Unpolished and Treated and polished
Pre-analysis

 The Data Set consist of 75 Rows (Samples) and 2 Columns (Features).

 Mean for Unpolished is 134.11 and for Treated and Polished is 147.79
 Standard Deviation for Unpolished is 33.04 and for Treated and Polished is 15.59
 There are no Missing Values
 Both the data are Normally distributed across the samples
These are two and one outliers in Treated and Polished and Unpolished respectively
5.1 Earlier experience of Zingaro with this particular client is favorable as the stone surface was
found to be of adequate hardness. However, Zingaro has reason to believe now that the
unpolished stones may not be suitable for printing. Do you think Zingaro is justified in thinking
so?
Step 1: Define null and alternative hypotheses
Null Hypotheses states that Mean Brinell’s hardness Index of unpolished stone surface, u is
greater than or equal to 150.
Alternate Hypothesis states that Mean Brinell’s hardness Index of unpolished stone surface, u is
less than 150.
OR
Ho: u>=150
Ha: u<150

STEP 2-Decide the significance Level

Here we select alpha, 𝛼=0.05
Step 3: Identify the test statistic
We do not know the population standard deviation although the sample size is more than 30
still we use the t distribution and the 𝑡𝑆𝑇𝐴𝑇 test statistic. It is left tailed t test.
Step 4: Calculate the p - value and test statistic

scipy.stats.ttest_1 sample calculates the t test for the mean of one sample given the sample
observations and the expected value in the null hypothesis. This function returns t statistic and
the two-tailed p value.

Values of t statistic= -4.1646296

Value of p = 4.171286995e-05

Step 5 Decide to reject or accept null hypothesis

At Level of significance: 0.05

We reject the null hypothesis since p value < Level of significance

So the statistical decision is we reject the null hypothesis at 5% level of significance

It means that there is sufficient evidence for Zingaro stone printing company to believe that
unpolished stones are not suitable for printing, that is they have Brinell’s hardness index of less
than 150.

5.2 Is the mean hardness of the polished and unpolished stones the same?

 Mean for Unpolished is 134.11 and for Treated and Polished is 147.79. Therefore, the
mean is not same.

Problem 6:

Aquarius health club, one of the largest and most popular cross-fit gyms in the country has
been advertising a rigorous program for body conditioning. The program is considered
successful if the candidate is able to do more than 5 push-ups, as compared to when he/she
enrolled in the program. Using the sample data provided can you conclude whether the
program is successful? (Consider the level of Significance as 5%)

Note that this is a problem of the paired-t-test. Since the claim is that the training will make a
difference of more than 5, the null and alternative hypotheses must be formed accordingly.
Using the sample data provided can you conclude whether the program is successful?

 The T statistic is: 19.322619811082458

 The corresponding pvalue is: 1.1460209626255983e-35
 In this scenario, the p value is very less than the 0.05.
 Hence we reject the null hypothesis
 The program is not successful. .

Problem 7:
Dental implant data: The hardness of metal implant in dental cavities depends on multiple
factors, such as the method of implant, the temperature at which the metal is treated, the alloy
used as well as on the dentists who may favour one method above another and may work
better in his/her favourite method. The response is the variable of interest.
1. Test whether there is any difference among the dentists on the implant hardness. State
the null and alternative hypotheses. Note that both types of alloys cannot be considered
together. You must state the null and alternative hypotheses separately for the two
types of alloys.?
Hypothesis for the Anova
H_0: The mean response is the same for all three dentists.
H_a: For at least one pair of dentists the mean response will be different.
H_0:The mean response is same for both types of alloys.
H_a:The mean response is different for both types of alloys.
Testing of the null Hypothesis
After performing one way Anova on ‘Dentist’ with respect to ‘response’ we get p value as 0.11
Sine the p value is greater than alpha (0.05) we fail to reject null hypothesis.
Thus, the mean response for all the three types of dentist is same.
2. Before the hypotheses may be tested, state the required assumptions. Are the
assumptions fulfilled? Comment separately on both alloy types.?
Required assumptions-
The samples drawn from different populations are independent and random.
There should be no significant outliers.
Dependent variable should be measured at the continues level.
Independent variables should each consist of tow or more categorical , independent groups.
Dependent variable should be approximately normally distributed for each combination of
the group so two independent variables.
Number of observations in each group are same.
There is homogeneity of variance
IN OUR DATASET THE FOLLOWING ASSUMPTIONS ARE FULLFILLED.

 The samples drawn from different populations are independent and random.
 Outliers are removed
 Dependent variable is measured at continuous level.
 Independent variables consist of two or more categorical, independent groups.
 In three variables pvalue is more than alpha, so fail to reject H0, and variances are
equal
 We used Shapiro test and Anderson Darling test to check weather are sample data
is from normal distribution or not. Some of the variables are not normal.

3. Irrespective of your conclusion in 2, we will continue with the testing procedure. What
do you conclude regarding whether implant hardness depends on dentists? Clearly state
your conclusion. If the null hypothesis is rejected, is it possible to identify which pairs of
dentists differ?
Hypothesis for the Anova

H_0: The mean response is the same for all three dentists.
H_a: For at least one pair of dentists the mean response will be different.
Testing of the null Hypothesis
After performing one way Anova on ‘Dentist’ with respect to ‘response’ we get p value as 0.11
Sine the p value is greater than alpha (0.05) we fail to reject null hypothesis.
Thus, the mean response for all the three types of dentist is same.

After drawing the poinplot we can clearly see that mean count for dentist 1 is way highest, but
the sample data is not enough to conclude that. Also Anova does not help us identify which
pairs of dentist differ.

4. Now test whether there is any difference among the methods on the hardness of dental
implant, separately for the two types of alloys. What are your conclusions? If the null
hypothesis is rejected, is it possible to identify which pairs of methods differ?
Hypothesis for the Anova
H_0: The mean response is the same for all three types of methods on the hardness of
dental implant.
H_a: For at least one pair of dentists the mean response will be different.
Testing of the null Hypothesis
After performing Anova and looking at the interaction effect we get p value as smaller than
alpha thus we reject null hypothesis.

After drawing the pointplot we can clearly see there is an intereaction effect, but the sample
data is not enough to conclude that. Also Anova does not help us identify which pairs of dentist
differ.
 5. Now test whether there is any difference among the temperature levels on the
hardness of dental implant, separately for the two types of alloys. What are your
conclusions? If the null hypothesis is rejected, is it possible to identify which levels of
temperatures differ?
Null hypothesis-
6. Consider the interaction effect of dentist and method and comment on the interaction
plot, separately for the two types of alloys?
P value for interaction effect of dentist and method is 1.657388e-02

Since the p value for interaction effect is way less than alpha, we can conclude that there is no
effect of interaction effect on our response variable.
Since the lines are not parallel to each other and clearly two lines are intersecting each other it
means that there is significant interaction between the dentist and method used.
7. Now consider the effect of both factors, dentist, and method, separately on each alloy.
What do you conclude? Is it possible to identify which dentists are different, which
methods are different, and which interaction levels are different?
It is not possible to find out which methods are different, and which interaction levels are
different using anova.