A company manufacturing computer chips finds that 8% of all chips manufactured are defective. Management is concerned that employee inattention is partially responsible for the high defect rate. In an effort to decrease the percentage of defective chips, management decides to offer incentives to employees who have lower defect rates on their shifts. The incentive program is instituted for one month. If successful, the company will continue with the incentive program. 1) Match the appropriate null and alternative hypotheses in this setting. ) Ho a. P.08 |H b. Ps .08 с. Р» .08 d. P<.08 e. P2 .08 f. P..08 2) Match a type I and type |l error in context. ) Type II Error ) Type I Error a. Thinking the incentive program helped decrease the defect rate - when it actually didn't help b. Thinking the incentive program helped decrease the defect rate when it actually did c. Thinking the incentive program didn't raise the defect rate when it actually didn't. d. Thinking the incentive program didn't help decrease the defect rate - when it actually did help 3) Which error, the Type I or the Type II do you consider a worse mistake? Select an answer

MATLAB: An Introduction with Applications
6th Edition
ISBN:9781119256830
Author:Amos Gilat
Publisher:Amos Gilat
Chapter1: Starting With Matlab
Section: Chapter Questions
Problem 1P
icon
Related questions
Question
**Company Chip Defect Case Study**

A company manufacturing computer chips finds that 8% of all chips manufactured are defective. Management is concerned that employee inattention is partially responsible for the high defect rate. In an effort to decrease the percentage of defective chips, management decides to offer incentives to employees who have lower defect rates on their shifts. The incentive program is instituted for one month. If successful, the company will continue with the incentive program.

**1) Hypothesis Testing**

Match the appropriate null and alternative hypotheses in this setting.

- \( H_0 \)
  - (Options: a. P = .08, b. P ≤ .08, c. P > .08, d. P < .08, e. P ≥ .08, f. P ≠ .08)

- \( H_1 \)
  - (Options: a. P = .08, b. P ≤ .08, c. P > .08, d. P < .08, e. P ≥ .08, f. P ≠ .08)

**2) Type I and Type II Errors**

Match a type I and type II error in context.

- **Type I Error:**  
  (Options: a. Thinking the incentive program helped decrease the defect rate - when it actually didn’t help, b. Thinking the incentive program helped decrease the defect rate when it actually did)

- **Type II Error:**  
  (Options: c. Thinking the incentive program didn’t raise the defect rate when it actually didn’t, d. Thinking the incentive program didn’t help decrease the defect rate - when it actually did help)

**3) Error Analysis**

Which error, the Type I or the Type II, do you consider a worse mistake?

- [Select an answer]

**4) Limiting Errors**

How would you limit the probability of making this error (that you stated in Question 3)?

- [Select an answer]

**5) Increasing Other Error Probabilities**

Doing this (your action in Question 4) would increase the probability of making a:

- [Select an answer]
Transcribed Image Text:**Company Chip Defect Case Study** A company manufacturing computer chips finds that 8% of all chips manufactured are defective. Management is concerned that employee inattention is partially responsible for the high defect rate. In an effort to decrease the percentage of defective chips, management decides to offer incentives to employees who have lower defect rates on their shifts. The incentive program is instituted for one month. If successful, the company will continue with the incentive program. **1) Hypothesis Testing** Match the appropriate null and alternative hypotheses in this setting. - \( H_0 \) - (Options: a. P = .08, b. P ≤ .08, c. P > .08, d. P < .08, e. P ≥ .08, f. P ≠ .08) - \( H_1 \) - (Options: a. P = .08, b. P ≤ .08, c. P > .08, d. P < .08, e. P ≥ .08, f. P ≠ .08) **2) Type I and Type II Errors** Match a type I and type II error in context. - **Type I Error:** (Options: a. Thinking the incentive program helped decrease the defect rate - when it actually didn’t help, b. Thinking the incentive program helped decrease the defect rate when it actually did) - **Type II Error:** (Options: c. Thinking the incentive program didn’t raise the defect rate when it actually didn’t, d. Thinking the incentive program didn’t help decrease the defect rate - when it actually did help) **3) Error Analysis** Which error, the Type I or the Type II, do you consider a worse mistake? - [Select an answer] **4) Limiting Errors** How would you limit the probability of making this error (that you stated in Question 3)? - [Select an answer] **5) Increasing Other Error Probabilities** Doing this (your action in Question 4) would increase the probability of making a: - [Select an answer]
Expert Solution
trending now

Trending now

This is a popular solution!

steps

Step by step

Solved in 2 steps with 3 images

Blurred answer
Similar questions
Recommended textbooks for you
MATLAB: An Introduction with Applications
MATLAB: An Introduction with Applications
Statistics
ISBN:
9781119256830
Author:
Amos Gilat
Publisher:
John Wiley & Sons Inc
Probability and Statistics for Engineering and th…
Probability and Statistics for Engineering and th…
Statistics
ISBN:
9781305251809
Author:
Jay L. Devore
Publisher:
Cengage Learning
Statistics for The Behavioral Sciences (MindTap C…
Statistics for The Behavioral Sciences (MindTap C…
Statistics
ISBN:
9781305504912
Author:
Frederick J Gravetter, Larry B. Wallnau
Publisher:
Cengage Learning
Elementary Statistics: Picturing the World (7th E…
Elementary Statistics: Picturing the World (7th E…
Statistics
ISBN:
9780134683416
Author:
Ron Larson, Betsy Farber
Publisher:
PEARSON
The Basic Practice of Statistics
The Basic Practice of Statistics
Statistics
ISBN:
9781319042578
Author:
David S. Moore, William I. Notz, Michael A. Fligner
Publisher:
W. H. Freeman
Introduction to the Practice of Statistics
Introduction to the Practice of Statistics
Statistics
ISBN:
9781319013387
Author:
David S. Moore, George P. McCabe, Bruce A. Craig
Publisher:
W. H. Freeman