But, the fit is nearly as good without it, and so for interpretive purposes (instead of get-the-best-fit purposes), dropping the quadratic term makes for a better model:
With this model, our estimating function is as follows:Read 99 items Read 99 items Call: lm(formula = log10(count) ~ xp) Residuals: Min 1Q Median 3Q Max -0.16823 -0.10095 -0.01733 0.07757 0.25553 Coefficients: Estimate Std. Error t value Pr(>|t|) (Intercept) 4.194851 0.023379 179.43 <2e-16 *** xp -0.027268 0.000406 -67.17 <2e-16 *** --- Signif. codes: 0 `***' 0.001 `**' 0.01 `*' 0.05 `.' 0.1 ` ' 1 Residual standard error: 0.1154 on 97 degrees of freedom Multiple R-Squared: 0.979, Adjusted R-squared: 0.9787 F-statistic: 4512 on 1 and 97 DF, p-value: < 2.2e-16
From this, it's easy to see that we have classic exponential decay w.r.t. XP.sub estimate_count_from_xp($) { my $xp = shift; 10 ** ( 4.195 - 0.2727 * $xp ); }
Does this match your intuition?
Tom Moertel : Blog / Talks / LectroTest / PXSL / Coffee / Movie Rating Decoder
In reply to Re^2: OK, here's your analysis (w/ picture!)
by tmoertel
in thread (contest) Help analyze PM reputation statistics
by demerphq
For: | Use: | ||
& | & | ||
< | < | ||
> | > | ||
[ | [ | ||
] | ] |