Since I don’t understand the situation well enough, I am not able to comment further.

Charles ]]>

Understood. The weibull pdf is for the wind distribution and I was trying to insert x with 0.5 unit because that’s the way that the turbine supplier is giving to me the power coefficient curve (so weibull distribution times 8760 hours in a year times the power curve will result in the annual energy production). I can do the job with the intergers only but the result should not be the same. While I am writing I am considering running a monte carlo like =(α*(-LN(1-Rand()))^(1/β))+min. I have to figure out the best way to do format that but this is a possibility. Do you have any advice?

Best regards,

Pedro ]]>

Are you worried about experimentwise error since you are performing multiple test (or am I missing the point of your question)?

Charles ]]>

Sorry, but I don’t understand the situation that you are describing. Please fill in some of the details.

Charles ]]>

That too is a reasonable approach, and in fact I used to use that calculation. I recently changed the approach to use the common variance MSE found in cell I15, since this seemed to be the more commonly used approach. A case can be made for either approach.

Charles ]]>

If you are using a split plot design, then I suggest that you use the tools described on the following webpage:

http://www.real-statistics.com/design-of-experiments/split-plot-design/

Charles ]]>

You are correct. The formula should read n(n^2-1). The difference in the output is usually not great, and for now you would need to correct the formula manually. I will correct this in the software shortly. Strangely, the ties formula used on the referenced webpage is the right one and so gives the correct value.

Thank you very much for finding this error. I really appreciate your help.

Charles ]]>

Charles ]]>

Fleiss’ kappa is designed for categorical ratings. You are using ordered ratings and so the order will not be taken into account in Fleiss’ kappa. You might be able to use the intraclass correlation (ICC) instead or some form of weighted Fleiss’ kappa. Kendall’s W might also work. These approaches are described on the Real Statistics website.

Here is an article about weighted Fleiss’ Kappa:

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/24033178_Weighted_kappa_for_multiple_raters

Charles ]]>

If you have a discrete distribution, then you can sum pdf values as you have described. You can’t do this with a continuous distribution such as the Weibull distribution. Why do you want to do this sort of summing anyway?

Glad you like the website.

Charles ]]>