NavList:
A Community Devoted to the Preservation and Practice of Celestial Navigation and Other Methods of Traditional Wayfinding
Re: Bias and cocked hats
From: Peter Fogg
Date: 2007 Apr 20, 08:48 +1000
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
To post to this group, send email to NavList@fer3.com
To , send email to NavList-@fer3.com
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
From: Peter Fogg
Date: 2007 Apr 20, 08:48 +1000
Bill Noyce wrote:
Summarizing the results, we see that when the bias is zero, the chance
of the cocked hat surrounding the true position is 25% -- confirming
what we already knew. When the bias is more than 3 sd, the cocked
hat surrounds the true position in over 99% of the cases. When the
bias is 0.8 sd, the cocked hat surrounds the true position in 50% of
the cases. It doesn't matter whether the bias is positive or negative
(I assume differences of 1% are the expected fluctuation from the
Monte Carlo process). And the actual magnitudes of the errors don't
matter (for determining this percentage) -- only their relative sizes.
Summarizing the results, we see that when the bias is zero, the chance
of the cocked hat surrounding the true position is 25% -- confirming
what we already knew. When the bias is more than 3 sd, the cocked
hat surrounds the true position in over 99% of the cases. When the
bias is 0.8 sd, the cocked hat surrounds the true position in 50% of
the cases. It doesn't matter whether the bias is positive or negative
(I assume differences of 1% are the expected fluctuation from the
Monte Carlo process). And the actual magnitudes of the errors don't
matter (for determining this percentage) -- only their relative sizes.
Many thanks to Bill Noyce for presenting this summary of DW's Monte Carlo simulation.
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
To post to this group, send email to NavList@fer3.com
To , send email to NavList-@fer3.com
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---