Victor D. Saldaña C.

PhD(c) in Geoinformatics Engineering
Technical University of Madrid (Spain)
September 2016

Overview.

This is the report of the second part of the Statistical Inference Peer Assignment: Basic inferential data analysis. It includes supporting material such as the codes and figures.

1. Load packages.

library("ggplot2")
library("knitr")
library("datasets")
library("ggplot2")
library("ggpmisc")
library("gridExtra")
library("plyr")

2. Reproducibility.

# Set the seed (55) for reproducibility, i.e., make available to others the data to verify
#the calculations made with the code. 
set.seed(55)

3. Load the data.

#3. Load the data.
#The data we are going to use in this part of the assignment is the ToothGrowth.
data("ToothGrowth")
df<-ToothGrowth

4. Basic summary of the data.

#Let's summarize and do some tables and quick plots with cluster to explore the data. 
summary(df)
##       len        supp         dose      
##  Min.   : 4.20   OJ:30   Min.   :0.500  
##  1st Qu.:13.07   VC:30   1st Qu.:0.500  
##  Median :19.25           Median :1.000  
##  Mean   :18.81           Mean   :1.167  
##  3rd Qu.:25.27           3rd Qu.:2.000  
##  Max.   :33.90           Max.   :2.000
table(df$supp, df$dose)
##     
##      0.5  1  2
##   OJ  10 10 10
##   VC  10 10 10

5. Confidence intervals and/or hypothesis tests.

#Let's calculate the confidence intervals (ci) for the mean len of the sample with a #confidence level of 95%
mean_tooth<-mean(ToothGrowth$len)
ci<-mean_tooth + c(-1, 1) * 1.96 * sd(ToothGrowth$len)/sqrt(nrow(ToothGrowth))
paste("mean=",round(mean_tooth,3),",","ci_min=",round(ci[1],3),",","ci_max=",round(ci[2],3))
## [1] "mean= 18.813 , ci_min= 16.878 , ci_max= 20.749"
#Now, let's get the same values by supplement type and dose.    
means_by_supp<-tapply(ToothGrowth$len,ToothGrowth$supp,mean)
means_by_dose<-tapply(ToothGrowth$len,ToothGrowth$dose,mean)

ci_supp_OJ<-means_by_supp[1] + c(-1, 1) * 1.96 * 
sd(ToothGrowth[ToothGrowth$supp=="OJ",]$len)/sqrt(nrow(ToothGrowth[ToothGrowth$supp=="OJ",]))
ci_supp_VC<-means_by_supp[2] + c(-1, 1) * 1.96 * 
sd(ToothGrowth[ToothGrowth$supp=="VC",]$len)/sqrt(nrow(ToothGrowth[ToothGrowth$supp=="VC",]))

ci_dose_0.5<-means_by_dose[1] + c(-1, 1) * 1.96 * 
sd(ToothGrowth[ToothGrowth$dose==0.5,]$len)/sqrt(nrow(ToothGrowth[ToothGrowth$dose==0.5,]))
ci_dose_1.0<-means_by_dose[2] + c(-1, 1) * 1.96 * 
sd(ToothGrowth[ToothGrowth$dose==1.0,]$len)/sqrt(nrow(ToothGrowth[ToothGrowth$dose==1.0,]))
ci_dose_2.0<-means_by_dose[3] + c(-1, 1) * 1.96 * 
sd(ToothGrowth[ToothGrowth$dose==2.0,]$len)/sqrt(nrow(ToothGrowth[ToothGrowth$dose==2.0,]))

#Let's calculate the range of the interval.
dif_supp_OJ<-ci_supp_OJ[2]-ci_supp_OJ[1]
dif_supp_VC<-ci_supp_VC[2]-ci_supp_VC[1]
dif_dose_0.5<-ci_dose_0.5[2]-ci_dose_0.5[1]
dif_dose_1.0<-ci_dose_1.0[2]-ci_dose_1.0[1]
dif_dose_2.0<-ci_dose_2.0[2]-ci_dose_2.0[1]
## [1] "mean_by_OJ= 20.663 , ci_min= 18.3 , ci_max= 23.027 , dif_ci= 4.728"
## [1] "mean_by_VC= 16.963 , ci_min= 14.005 , ci_max= 19.921 , dif_ci= 5.916"
## [1] "mean_by_dose_of_0.5= 10.605 , ci_min= 8.633 , ci_max= 12.577 , dif_ci= 3.944"
## [1] "mean_by_dose_of_1.0= 19.735 , ci_min= 17.8 , ci_max= 21.67 , dif_ci= 3.87"
## [1] "mean_by_dose_of_2.0= 26.1 , ci_min= 24.446 , ci_max= 27.754 , dif_ci= 3.308"
#Let's consider dose and supp at the same time. Let's suppose len (Tooth Length) is normal #distributed. So, no matter the sample size the distribution of the sample mean is normally #distributed, as well. Let's also assume that the 60 observations are independent. Now, let's also
#suppose that the sample have been divided randomly in two groups of 30 individuals. One of these #groups (OJ or VC). We can consider that the two groups are sample from two different population, and let suppose these two population have the same variance. 

#Therefore, we have two samples of 30 observations each from two population with the len variable #is normally distributed and not have the same variance. Now we want to evaluate is the difference #in the mean of the len in both group is just by chance or depends on the supplement and dose. So, #the null hypothesis we want to contrast is that the mean difference between the two is zero (0).
#Let's do this contrast first with all doses together and then by dose. In any case, with a 95% #confidence levels, so that we have only a 5% chance of making a Type I error.

t.test(ToothGrowth[ToothGrowth$supp=="OJ",]$len, y = ToothGrowth[ToothGrowth$supp=="VC",]$len, alternative = "two.sided", mu = 0, paired = FALSE, var.equal = TRUE, conf.level = 0.95)
## 
##  Two Sample t-test
## 
## data:  ToothGrowth[ToothGrowth$supp == "OJ", ]$len and ToothGrowth[ToothGrowth$supp == "VC", ]$len
## t = 1.9153, df = 58, p-value = 0.06039
## alternative hypothesis: true difference in means is not equal to 0
## 95 percent confidence interval:
##  -0.1670064  7.5670064
## sample estimates:
## mean of x mean of y 
##  20.66333  16.96333
#Now, let's do the same by dose.  
#P-values.
paste("pv_0.5=",round(as.numeric(pv_0.5),6),",","pv_1.0=",round(as.numeric(pv_1.0),6),",","pv_2.0=",round(as.numeric(pv_2.0),5))
## [1] "pv_0.5= 0.005304 , pv_1.0= 0.000781 , pv_2.0= 0.96371"

6. Assumptions and conclusions.

6.1. Assumptions.

In this analysis I have assume that:
1. The len (Tooth Length) variable is normal distributed.
2. The 60 observations in the sample are independent.
3. The sample has been divided randomly in two groups of 30 individuals. Every group was given a different supplement.
4. Every group have the same variance.
5. For doing hypothesis tests the null hypothesis is that there is not difference between means of the groups.
6. The confidence level to contrast the hypothesis is 95%. So, the significance level is 5% and any p value greater than this value rejects the hypothesis.

6.2. Conclusions.

1. The mean of the len including all both supplement and doses (60 obs.) is 18.813.
2. Divided by supplement the growth by Orange Juice (OJ) is 20.663 and by Vitamin C (VC) is 16.963.
3. Under the assumptions this difference by supplement (20.663 -16.963=3.700) is significant because the p value is 6.039% which is greater than the 5% of significance level. Therefore, the null hypothesis is rejected.
4. Doing a hypothesis test by dose the results suggest that only in the case of dose=2.0 mg/day the difference is by chance. In the others cases (0.5 y 1.0 mg/day) the evidence is strong enough to reject the null hypothesis.