Search All of the Math Forum:
Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by
NCTM or The Math Forum.



Effect of multiplying SE by sqrt(N), as per your post of 12/14 at 10:34pm
Posted:
Dec 15, 2012 1:33 AM


I have sent offline a PDF of the plots of AuqSE for N_1_a1_S and N_2_a1_s AFTER multiplying AuqSE by sqrt of its associated N. (This is the case we?ve been discussing in our last couple of posts as possibly indicating a putative ?SET? effect (set 1 vs set 2) on distribution of AuqSE over L.) Also, as you suggested in your last post, I?ve done these new plots as true scatter plots without connecting lines.
Next to the N_1_a1_S and N_2_a1_S plots in the PDF, I have placed the R_1_a1_S and R_2_a1_s plots for comparison, and also the N_1_a1_C and N_2_a1_C plots. All four of these additional plots were also computed with the sqrt(N) multiplier.
After looking at the PDF, please let me know at your earliest convenience whether you agree with the following:
i) the switch from N_1 to N_2 STILL tightens the a1_S AuqSE distribution at higher values of L, even after multiplication of SE by sqrt(N) (so the effect is presumably NOT a samplesize artifact.)
ii) the switch from R_1 to R_2 does NOT tighten the a1_S AuqSE distribtion at higher vslues of L;
iii) the switch from N_1 to N_2 does NOT tighten the a1_C AugSE distribution at higher values of L.
If you do agree with (iiii), then I have to start again and, as above, present you with all N_1_S v N_2_S plots sidesidebyside with the corresponding R_1_S and R_2_S plots and the corresponding N_1_C vs N_2_C plots. (Any other choice of presentation would make it necessasry to shuffle too many sheets of paper (or windows) to see the presence/absence of the critical effect.) In addition, I have to regenerate the same ntuples of plots with N_1 replaced by N_3 and R1 replaced by R3 throughout.
BUT, as per your instruction to work downwards from the most complex regression, I will start with the plots for AubqeSE and AubquSE (the SE?s of the average slopes for the regression of c on (e,u,u*e,u^2).
I don?t know how to thank you beyond my usual expressions of gratitude ? we MAY have reached ?critical mass? here with respect to data that not only legitimize our linear regressions as generators of predictors for our logistic regressions, but also support a very SIMPLE evolutionary hypothesis regarding the role of the S subsets of our three nonrandom dicodon sets in the evolution of protein messages and the structures arising therefrom.
Finally, I will be talking to Arthur Lesk this weekend about a1 hemoglobin structure, so ?for the record?, please note the change in the distribution of AuqSe at N_1_a1_S and N_2_a1_S somewhere between 60 < =L <= 80. If my memory of hemoglobin structure is still intact, it is no accident we?re seeing a change in the distribution of AuqSE within this length interval.



