Test $H_0 : \mu=0$ against $H_A: \mu > 0.$

85 Views Asked by At

Had the following question on my exam today and I'm just wondering if I did this correctly.

From a normally distributed population with mean $\mu$ and variance $\sigma^2$ a sample has been drawn:

$$\mathbf{X}=(0.05,4.35,-0.48,-0.63,1.17,2.01).$$

a) Test $H_0 : \mu=0$ against $H_A: \mu > 0$ on a $5$% significance level under the assumption that $\sigma^2$ is unknown.

c) Do the same test, given that $\sigma=1.5.$

Solution: I know that $H_0$ is to be rejected if $T\geq c,$ where $T$ is the teststatistic and $F_{t_{n-1}}=1-\alpha,$ where $\alpha$ is the significance level.

So lets first compute them for a), where we need to use a $t$-distribution since $\sigma$ is unknown, so we have that $c=F^{-1}_{t_5}(0.95)\approx2.015.$ Also, the estimator for $\sigma^2$ is

$$s^2=\frac{1}{n-1}\left(\sum_{k=1}^{n}X_k^2-\frac{1}{n}\left(\sum_{k=1}^{n}X_k\right)^2\right)=\frac{1}{5}(24.961-\frac{1}{6}(41.861))=3.405,$$

so, $s=\sqrt{3.405}=1.845.$ We also have that $\overline{X}=6.47/6=1.078.$

The teststatistic is

$$T=\frac{\overline{X}-\mu_0}{s/\sqrt{n}}=\frac{1.078-0}{1.845/\sqrt{6}}=\frac{1.078}{0.753}=1.43\leq c,$$

which means that we can not reject $H_0.$

For b) we do an identical approach but wtith $s=\sigma=1.5$ and we use a $z$-test instead. Here we have that $c = \Phi^{-1}(0.95)=1.644.$ The teststatistic in this case is

$$Z=\frac{\overline{X}-\mu_0}{\sigma/\sqrt{n}}=\frac{1.078}{1.5/\sqrt{6}}=1.76\ge c,$$

thus we reject $H_0.$

Is this correct?


What my professor does in the solutions is he just makes a $95$% confidenceinterval and just arrives to the same conclusions as I've done. Is his method correct without using the teststatistics?

1

There are 1 best solutions below

0
On BEST ANSWER

Yes, your solution is indeed correct. You are doing exactly what is required to, while your professor is solving a bit more general problem, namely constructing the $95\%$ confidence interval and then checks whether given values are inside this interval or no.

This, I think, is just a manner of habit. I, personally, am used to the one presented in your post.