General Asylum

RE: You're obfuscating. Or maybe not.

87.185.107.97

andy19191

In Reply to: RE: You're obfuscating. Or maybe not. posted by Jim Austin on March 28, 2008 at 13:26:53

> To relate it to audio, it shows that in that test, audibility was not
> proven. That's not the same thing as proving that it's inaudible. This
> really is just simple logic.

Given a set of results from an audibility experiment you can test the hypothesis: are the results drawn from a population that can hear a difference?. If the answer is no then as you point out one has not shown the opposite.

However, you can also test the hypothesis: are the results drawn from a population that cannot hear a difference (i.e. a random population)? If the answer to that is yes then you have shown to a given level of confidence that a sound cannot be perceived.

Indeed it is only simple logic.

Follow Ups:

There are two cases you need to consider: - Jim Austin 06:02:26 03/29/08 (2)
- RE: There are two cases you need to consider: - andy19191 06:42:22 03/30/08 (1)
  - RE: There are two cases you need to consider: - Jim Austin 12:47:29 03/30/08 (0)

Post a Followup:

FAQ

Post a Message!

Forgot Password?

Moniker (Username):
Password (Optional):
	Remember my Moniker & Password (What's this?) Eat Me
E-Mail (Optional):
Subject:

Message:	(Posts are subject to Content Rules)

Optional Link URL:
Optional Link Title:
Optional Image URL:
Upload Image:
E-mail Replies:	Automagically notify you when someone responds.

To view your new posting or follow-up, click on the RELOAD or REFRESH button on your browser.