Talk:Correlation correction for attenuation

Question

is it better to use your TCG offset to compensate for material and standard compatibility or material attenuation correction to equalize the difference. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.235.75.2 (talk • contribs) 16:59, 7 February 2007 207.235.75.2

Merge discussion

The suggestion is to merge Correction for attenuation and Disattenuation as these are essentially the same topics. I envisage using Correction for attenuation for the title, but with the main version of text taken from Disattenuation. Comments? Melcombe (talk) 16:42, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

Merger done, but still many problems. Melcombe (talk) 11:15, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

the disattenuated correlation

According to the formula in the article, it seems that the absolute value of disattenuated correlation would end up greater than 1. Am I right? 203.98.92.232 (talk) 06:57, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

This article needs attention

The first paragraph states:

" The correlation between two sets of parameters [...]"

However, in a frequentist framework, parameters do not have a distribution (hence, they have no correlation). This occurs in other places in the article and needs some tidying up.

Tal Galili (talk) 21:30, 30 December 2014 (UTC)