Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
2
1, it would have meant that our data did have some kind of correlation; however, 0.11 is too
close to zero and our coefficient of determination tells us that there is no correlation between the
height of swimmers and their swimming times.
The coefficient of determination can tell you if a data set has correlation, and it can tell
you how much of the variation is explained by the linear model. Because our r = 0.11, we can
tell that 11% of our data is explained. We can find this percent by multiplying r by 100. If 11%
of the variation is explained by the linear model, this means that 89% of our variation is
unexplained by our linear model. Because there is such a large percent of the variation
unexplained, we can tell that there are lurking variables influencing our y variables.
One lurking variable that could be affecting the olympic swimmer's time is simply that the
swimmer might not have had their best day. It is rare that in the olympics whenever the
swimmers compete they get a personal record, this shows that some swimmers have swam
better on another day. One lurking variable is that the swimmers were just having an off day.
Another lurking variable that could be present are injuries. There have been some swimmers
that swim with sore shoulders or with cramped legs. Injuries could affect how fast a swimmer
finishes in their heat. Both of these lurking variables could affect our data set because some
swimmers may have decreased their time. Shorter swimmers and taller swimmers could both
have been affected by these lurking variables and because of this, any of our times could have
changed, meaning that while these lurking variables may have affected our data, it may not
have affected the results we concluded.
Our data had no correlation, therefore making it hard for us to predict interpolation or
extrapolation points. Interpolation is predicting values for x values that are between observed
x values in the data set. For example, we predicted what a 68 inch tall swimmers time might be.
In order to find this we plugged 68 into our regression line equation ( = -0.284x+137.996). We
found that a swimmer with a height of 68 inches might swim a time of 117.28 seconds. While
interpolation can be close the correct answer, extrapolations is more likely to be inaccurate
because extrapolation deals with a data point outside of the data set. Extrapolation is predicting
values for x values that are beyond observed x values in a data set. An example of
extrapolation for our data set would be predicting the swim time of an 80 inch tall swimmer might
be. In order to estimate the swim time value, we plugged in 80 for x in our regression line
equation and got 115.28 seconds. This means that, based on our data, an 80 inch tall swimmer
might swim the 200 meter butterfly in 115.28 seconds. However, this number could be
3
inaccurate because it is outside of our data set, and because there is not a strong correlation
between our data values.
Times every other one:
http://london2012.nytimes.com/swimming/mens-200m-butterfly#heats
Times all:
https://www.rio2016.com/en/swimming-standings-sw-mens-200m-butterfly