Chris Beck Math 104 project part 2 Quantitative Variable - Players batting average.

. SRS (Selected via TI-83) - 14, 402, 346, 232, 533, 405, 442, 65, 267, 531, 400, 37, 303, 297, 238, 82, 404, 178, 253, 199, 441, 18, 389, 121, 258, 375, 365, 165, 372, 156. Cluster 538 ball players were broken up into 49 group of eleven (except the last one - that was short a couple of players due to the overall number of players). 3 groups were randomly selected via the calculator from the list of 49 groups. 6, 20, and 4 were selected. Group #6 - 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, and 67. Group #20 - 211, 212, 213, 214, 215, 216, 217, 218, 219, 220, and 221. Group #4 - 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, and 45. COMPARISION AND CONTRASTS: I was surprised at first to see that the Mean and the Standard Deviation were so close on all three studies. My approach is to analyze the effectiveness of the SRS and Cluster methods compared to the total population of our survey list. I expected that the Standard Deviation would be closer between the population and the SRS. I was correct as I surmised that the SRS would give a truer reflection on the population than the cluster, mainly because it is more precise. In regards to the 5 number plots The SRS was closer to the population with the Q1, median, Q3 and Max. The Cluster method was closer with the Minimum , but not far off on the other aspects also. I dont think that the cluster method is all that great of a method for this type of exercise, but I expect both of them to perform better if the number of samples was increase. In regards to the shapes of the graphs, the cluster resulted in a left skewed orientation and the SRS resulted in a right skewed orientation but the SRS graph was far more pronounced, while the cluster was only slightly left skewed and much harder to see a trend. The population had a normal distribution shape that had a really pretty bell shaped curve. I expected a shape like that because of the large size of the population.

Summary statistics:
Column POPULATION BATTING AVERAGE Column SRS BATTING AVERAGE n 30 n 538 Std. dev. 0.023992669 Mean Min Q1 Median Q3 Max 0.28028253 0.217 0.264 Min 0.243 Q1 0.261 0.278 0.295 0.366 Q3 0.296 Max 0.344

Std. dev. 0.02366648

Mean 0.27963333

Median 0.2745

Column CLUSTER BATTING AVERAGE

n 33

Std. dev. 0.023595229

Mean

Min

Q1

Median

Q3

Max

0.28578788 0.224 0.268

0.285 0.303 0.328

SRS STATS 14 0.327 402 0.282 346 0.275 232 0.276 533 0.274 405 0.304 442 0.259 65 0.32 267 0.261 531 0.287 400 0.261 37 0.29 303 0.243 297 0.261 238 0.258 82 0.296 404 0.3 178 0.301 253 0.284 199 0.267 441 0.256 18 0.248 389 0.257 121 0.271 258 0.27 375 0.267 365 0.344 165 0.283 372 0.27 156 0.297 CLUSTER STATS 57 0.303 58 0.288 59 0.282 60 0.284 61 0.267 62 0.294

63 64 65 66 67 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45

0.259 0.255 0.32 0.325 0.316 0.29 0.277 0.26 0.287 0.317 0.261 0.306 0.285 0.268 0.224 0.284 0.328 0.286 0.29 0.285 0.29 0.272 0.266 0.256 0.317 0.279 0.31