The efficiency for a steel specimen immersed in a phosphating tank is the weight of the phosphate coating divided by the metal loss (both in mg/ft²). An article gave the accompanying data on tank temperature (x) and efficiency ratio (y). Temp. 171 173 174 175 175 176 177 178 Ratio 0.82 1.39 1.48 0.95 1.15 1.06 1.00 1.82 Temp. 181 181 181 181 181 182 182 183 Ratio 1.35 1.52 1.55 2.19 2.17 0.92 1.45 0.82 Temp. 183 183 183 185 185 186 187 189 Ratio 1.85 2.04 2.70 1.59 2.54 3.04 1.89 3.12 (a) Determine the equation of the estimated regression line. (Round all numerical values to four decimal places.) y = (b) Calculate a point estimate for true average efficiency ratio when tank temperature is 183. (Round your answer to four decimal places.) (c) Calculate the values of the residuals from the least squares line for the four observations for which temperature is 183. (Round your answers to two decimal places.) (183, 0.82) (183, 1.85) (183, 2.04) (183, 2.70) Why do they not all have the same sign? These residuals do not all have the same sign because in the cases of the first two pairs of observations, the observed efficiency ratios were smaller than the predicted value. In the cases of the last two pairs of observations, the observed efficiency ratios were larger than the predicted value. These residuals do not all have the same sign because in the case of the second pair of observations, the observed efficiency ratio was equal to the predicted value. In the cases of the other pairs of observations, the observed efficiency ratios were larger than the predicted value. These residuals do not all have the same sign because in the cases of the first two pairs of observations, the observed efficiency ratios were larger than the predicted value. In the cases of the last two pairs of observations, the observed efficiency ratios were smaller than the predicted value. These residuals do not all have the same sign because in the case of the third pair of observations, the observed efficiency ratio was equal to the predicted value. In the cases of the other pairs of observations, the observed efficiency ratios were smaller than the predicted value. (d) What proportion of the observed variation in efficiency ratio can be attributed to the simple linear regression relationship between the two variables? (Round your answer to three decimal places.)

Materials Science And Engineering Properties
1st Edition
ISBN:9781111988609
Author:Charles Gilmore
Publisher:Charles Gilmore
Chapter4: Temperature Effects On Atom Arrangements And Atom Motion
Section: Chapter Questions
Problem 4.5P
icon
Related questions
Question
100%
The efficiency for a steel specimen immersed in a phosphating tank is the weight of the phosphate coating divided by the metal loss (both in mg/ft²). An article gave the accompanying data on tank temperature (x) and efficiency ratio (y).
Temp.
171
173
174
175
175
176
177
178
Ratio
0.82
1.39
1.48
0.95
1.15
1.06
1.00
1.82
Temp.
181
181
181
181
181
182
182
183
Ratio
1.35 1.52
1.55
2.19
2.17
0.92
1.45
0.82
Temp.
183
183
183
185
185
186
187
189
Ratio
1.85
2.04
2.70
1.59
2.54 3.04 1.89
3.12
(a) Determine the equation of the estimated regression line. (Round all numerical values to four decimal places.)
y =
(b) Calculate a point estimate for true average efficiency ratio when tank temperature is 183. (Round your answer to four decimal places.)
(c) Calculate the values of the residuals from the least squares line for the four observations for which temperature is 183. (Round your answers to two decimal places.)
(183, 0.82)
(183, 1.85)
(183, 2.04)
(183, 2.70)
Why do they not all have the same sign?
These residuals do not all have the same sign because in the cases of the first two pairs of observations, the observed efficiency ratios were smaller than the predicted value. In the cases of the last two pairs of observations, the
observed efficiency ratios were larger than the predicted value.
These residuals do not all have the same sign because in the case of the second pair of observations, the observed efficiency ratio was equal to the predicted value. In the cases of the other pairs of observations, the observed
efficiency ratios were larger than the predicted value.
These residuals do not all have the same sign because in the cases of the first two pairs of observations, the observed efficiency ratios were larger than the predicted value. In the cases of the last two pairs of observations, the
observed efficiency ratios were smaller than the predicted value.
These residuals do not all have the same sign because in the case of the third pair of observations, the observed efficiency ratio was equal to the predicted value. In the cases of the other pairs of observations, the observed
efficiency ratios were smaller than the predicted value.
(d) What proportion of the observed variation in efficiency ratio can be attributed to the simple linear regression relationship between the two variables? (Round your answer to three decimal places.)
Transcribed Image Text:The efficiency for a steel specimen immersed in a phosphating tank is the weight of the phosphate coating divided by the metal loss (both in mg/ft²). An article gave the accompanying data on tank temperature (x) and efficiency ratio (y). Temp. 171 173 174 175 175 176 177 178 Ratio 0.82 1.39 1.48 0.95 1.15 1.06 1.00 1.82 Temp. 181 181 181 181 181 182 182 183 Ratio 1.35 1.52 1.55 2.19 2.17 0.92 1.45 0.82 Temp. 183 183 183 185 185 186 187 189 Ratio 1.85 2.04 2.70 1.59 2.54 3.04 1.89 3.12 (a) Determine the equation of the estimated regression line. (Round all numerical values to four decimal places.) y = (b) Calculate a point estimate for true average efficiency ratio when tank temperature is 183. (Round your answer to four decimal places.) (c) Calculate the values of the residuals from the least squares line for the four observations for which temperature is 183. (Round your answers to two decimal places.) (183, 0.82) (183, 1.85) (183, 2.04) (183, 2.70) Why do they not all have the same sign? These residuals do not all have the same sign because in the cases of the first two pairs of observations, the observed efficiency ratios were smaller than the predicted value. In the cases of the last two pairs of observations, the observed efficiency ratios were larger than the predicted value. These residuals do not all have the same sign because in the case of the second pair of observations, the observed efficiency ratio was equal to the predicted value. In the cases of the other pairs of observations, the observed efficiency ratios were larger than the predicted value. These residuals do not all have the same sign because in the cases of the first two pairs of observations, the observed efficiency ratios were larger than the predicted value. In the cases of the last two pairs of observations, the observed efficiency ratios were smaller than the predicted value. These residuals do not all have the same sign because in the case of the third pair of observations, the observed efficiency ratio was equal to the predicted value. In the cases of the other pairs of observations, the observed efficiency ratios were smaller than the predicted value. (d) What proportion of the observed variation in efficiency ratio can be attributed to the simple linear regression relationship between the two variables? (Round your answer to three decimal places.)
Expert Solution
steps

Step by step

Solved in 2 steps with 4 images

Blurred answer
Recommended textbooks for you
Materials Science And Engineering Properties
Materials Science And Engineering Properties
Civil Engineering
ISBN:
9781111988609
Author:
Charles Gilmore
Publisher:
Cengage Learning
Sustainable Energy
Sustainable Energy
Civil Engineering
ISBN:
9781337551663
Author:
DUNLAP, Richard A.
Publisher:
Cengage,
Engineering Fundamentals: An Introduction to Engi…
Engineering Fundamentals: An Introduction to Engi…
Civil Engineering
ISBN:
9781305084766
Author:
Saeed Moaveni
Publisher:
Cengage Learning