Post Reply 
TI-89 stats oddity (corr)
05-30-2015, 12:09 PM
Post: #1
TI-89 stats oddity (corr)
I was messing around with some curve fitting on my 89 Titanium, since, while it would probably score dead last if we ranked calculators by usability * documentation quality / feature set, it's got a pretty decent stat package on board. (And it's actually not too shabby for programming, if you don't mind the horrible keyboard layout.)

If you run a linear regression, you get a value for corr. Nothing weird there. If you run a polynomial regression, you get R^2. But if you run one of the intrinsically linear regressions - LnReg, ExpEeg, and PowerReg, you get nothing indicating the quality of the fit.

Is there a mathematical reason for that, or is it just some really specific manifestation of laziness? My TI-86 and HP 48 both give correlation for those regression types, but nothing for polynomial (and the 48 just doesn't do polynomial period). The TI-36X Pro gives r and r^2 for the main four models, and R^2 for polynomial. My Casio fx-9860g Slim behaves similarly to the 36X Pro, and also reports MSe for a number of the models, which I'm not familiar with.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
05-30-2015, 01:55 PM
Post: #2
RE: TI-89 stats oddity (corr)
MSe is the Mean Squared Error, the average of the squared differences between predicted & actual values.

The 38G has a similar statistic, RELERR.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
05-30-2015, 02:15 PM
Post: #3
RE: TI-89 stats oddity (corr)
(05-30-2015 01:55 PM)Gerald H Wrote:  MSe is the Mean Squared Error, the average of the squared differences between predicted & actual values.

The 38G has a similar statistic, RELERR.

Yeah, I dug through the Casio manual just a little while ago and found that. Along with tons of other formulas implemented in various functions within the machine. For as awful as it is to program a Casio (lists are essentially unworkable; doing ANYTHING to an empty list throws a dim error), it's got a great feature set, and rather good manual.

Still not sure what's up with the inconsistent reporting of fit quality across TI machines.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)