 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Reference to broken DOI
editA reference was recently added to this article using the Cite DOI template. The citation bot tried to expand the citation, but could not access the specified DOI. Please check that the DOI doi:10.1198/tast.2010.08130 has been correctly entered. If the DOI is correct, it is possible that it has not yet been entered into the CrossRef database. Please complete the reference by hand here. The script that left this message was unable to track down the user who added the citation; it may be prudent to alert them to this message. Thanks, Citation bot 2 (talk) 14:28, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
Expert attention
edit| This topic is in need of attention from an expert on the subject. The section or sections that need attention may be noted in a message below. |
The supposed explanation of the approximate variance does not distinguish between a, b as random variables, as sample values, and as replacements for the theoretical means. Melcombe (talk) 15:16, 28 October 2010 (UTC)
- It also appears to assume, but does not state, that the two variables are uncorrelated. As this 'approximate' formulae' section is unreferenced and clearly has several problems I've decided to remove it as it's potentially misleading. Qwfp (talk) 10:53, 5 November 2016 (UTC)