Problem 1

A physiotherapist with a male football team is interested in studying the relationship

between foot injuries and the positions at which the players play from the data collected

Attacking
Striker Forward Winger Total
Midfielder
Players
45 56 24 20 145
Injured
Players Not
32 38 11 9 90
Injured
Total 77 94 35 29 235
 
1.1 What is the probability that a randomly chosen player would suffer an injury?

P(Suffered injury) = Total injured / total = 145/235 = 0.617

Probability that a randomly chosen player would suffer an injury is 0.617

1.2 What is the probability that a player is a forward or a winger?

P(Forward U Winger)
P(Forward) + P(Winger) - P(Forward n Winger)
94/235 + 29/235 = 123/235
0.5234
Probability that a player is a forward or a winger is 0.5234

1.3 What is the probability that a randomly chosen player plays in a striker position and has
a foot injury?

P(Stricker and Has foot injury)

P(Stricker n Foot injury)
45/77
0.5844
Probability that a randomly chosen player plays in a striker position and has a foot injury
is 0.5844

1.4 What is the probability that a randomly chosen injured player is a striker?

Total injured player = 145

Total Stricker who were injured = 45
P(chosen injured player is a striker) =  45/145 = 0.3103
Probability that a randomly chosen injured player is a striker is 0.3103

1.5 What is the probability that a randomly chosen injured player is either a forward or an
attacking midfielder? 
 Total injured player = 145
Total forward or attacking midfielder who were injured = 56 +24 = 80
P(injured player is either a forward or an attacking midfielder) =  80/145 = 0.3265
Probability that a randomly chosen injured player is either a forward or an attacking
midfielder is 0.3265
 
Problem 2

An independent research organization is trying to estimate the probability that an accident

at a nuclear power plant will result in radiation leakage. The types of accidents possible at
the plant are, fire hazards, mechanical failure, or human error. The research organization
also knows that two or more types of accidents cannot occur simultaneously.
According to the studies carried out by the organization, the probability of a radiation leak
in case of a fire is 20%, the probability of a radiation leak in case of a mechanical 50%, and
the probability of a radiation leak in case of a human error is 10%. The studies also showed
the following;

 The probability of a radiation leak occurring simultaneously with a fire is 0.1%.

 The probability of a radiation leak occurring simultaneously with a mechanical failure is
0.15%.
 The probability of a radiation leak occurring simultaneously with a human error is 0.12%.

On the basis of the information available, answer the questions below:

2.1 What are the probabilities of a fire, a mechanical failure, and a human error
respectively?

F= Event of Fire
M = Event of Mechanical failure
H= Even of Human Error
R = Event of Radiation Leak

Based on given information, the following values are known

P (R|F) = 20% = 0.2

P (R|M) = 50% = 0.5
P (R|H) = 10% = 0.1

P (F and R) = 0.1% = 0.001

P (M and R) = 0.15% = 0.0015
P (H and R) = 0.12% = 0.0012

The Probability of Fire is P (R|F) = P (F and R)/P (F)

P (F) = P (F and R) / P (R|F)
= 0.001 / 0.2
= 0.005
= 0.5%
 The Probability of Mechanical failure is P (R|M) = P (M and R)/P (M)
P (M) = P (M and R) / P (R|M)
= 0.0015 / 0.5
= 0.003
= 0.3%

The Probability of Mechanical failure is P (R|H) = P (H and R)/P (H)

P (H) = P (H and R) / P (R|H)
= 0.0012 / 0.1
= 0.012
= 1.2%

2.2 What is the probability of a radiation leak?

The probability of a radiation leak occurring simultaneously with a fire is given = 0.1%.
The probability of a radiation leak occurring simultaneously with a mechanical failure is
given = 0.15%.
The probability of a radiation leak occurring simultaneously with a human error is given =
0.12%

Therefore,
The probability of radiation leakage = 0.1+0.15+0.12
                                = 0.37%

2.3 Suppose there has been a radiation leak in the reactor for which the definite cause is not
known. What is the probability that it has been caused by:

 A Fire.
 A Mechanical Failure.
 A Human Error.

The probability of radiation leak occurred due to

Fire = 0.1/0.37
      = 0.27
= 27.027%

The probability of radiation leak occurred due to

Mechanical failure = 0.15/0.37
                              = 0.40
= 40.540%

The probability of radiation leak occurred due to

Human error = 0.12/0.37
                      = 0.32
= 32.432%
Problem 3:

The breaking strength of gunny bags used for packaging cement is normally distributed with
a mean of 5 kg per sq. centimeter and a standard deviation of 1.5 kg per sq. centimeter. The
quality team of the cement company wants to know the following about the packaging
material to better understand wastage or pilferage within the supply chain; Answer the
questions below based on the given information; (Provide an appropriate visual
representation of your answers, without which marks will be deducted)

we will use the normal distribution formula:

z = (x - μ) / σ
Where,

x = observed value
μ = mean
σ = standard deviation

z = z-score

3.1 What proportion of the gunny bags have a breaking strength less than 3.17 kg per sq
cm?
z = (3.17 - 5) / 1.5 = -1.21

 We can use CDF function, we have find out that 11.12% of Gunny Bags has less than
3.17 kg/cm^2 strength
 Using the standard normal distribution table, the area/proportion to the left of z-
score -1.21 is 0.1131.
 Therefore, the proportion of gunny bags with breaking strength less than 3.17 kg per
sq cm is 0.1131 or approximately 11.31%.

3.2 What proportion of the gunny bags have a breaking strength at least 3.6 kg per sq cm?

z = (3.6 - 5) / 1.5 = -0.93

 We can use CDF function, we have find out that 82.47% of Gunny Bags has at least
3.6 kg/cm^2 strength.
 Using the standard normal distribution table, the area/proportion to the right of z-
score -0.93 is 0.1753.
 Therefore, the proportion of gunny bags with breaking strength at least 3.6 kg per sq
cm is 1 - 0.1753 = 0.8247 or approximately 82.47%.

3.3 What proportion of the gunny bags have a breaking strength between 5 and 5.5 kg per
sq cm.?

z1 = (5 - 5) / 1.5 = 0
z2 = (5.5 - 5) / 1.5 = 0.33
  By using CDF function, we have find out that 13.05% of Gunny Bags has breaking
strength between 5 and 5.5 kg/cm^2 strength
 Using the standard normal distribution table, the area/proportion to the left of z-
score 0.33 is 0.6306 and the area/proportion to the right of z-score 0 is 0.5.
 Therefore, the proportion of gunny bags with breaking strength between 5 and 5.5
kg per sq cm is 0.6306 - 0.5 = 0.1305 or approximately 13.05%.

3.4 What proportion of the gunny bags have a breaking strength NOT between 3 and 7.5 kg
per sq cm.?

z1 = (3 - 5) / 1.5 = -1.33
z2 = (7.5 - 5) / 1.5 = 1.67

 By using CDF function, we have find out that 13.9% gunny bags have a breaking
strength NOT between 3 and 7.5 kg/cm^2.
 Using the standard normal distribution table, the area/proportion to the left of z-
score -1.33 is 0.0918 and the area/proportion to the right of z-score 1.67 is 0.9522.
 Therefore, the proportion of gunny bags with breaking strength between 3 and 7.5
kg per sq cm is 0.9525 - 0.0912 = 0.8610.
 So, the proportion of gunny bags with breaking strength not between 3 and 7.5 kg
per sq cm is 1 - 0.8610 = 0.1390 or approximately 13.90%.

Problem 4:

Grades of the final examination in a training course are found to be normally distributed,
with a mean of 77 and a standard deviation of 8.5. Based on the given information answer
the questions below

Given: Population Mean(µ) = 77

Population standard Deviation(σ) = 8.5

It is a Normally Distributed, so by stats library from scipy.stats

4.1 What is the probability that a randomly chosen student gets a grade below 85 on this
exam?

Sol:
z1=(x1-mu)/sigma
z1 = (85 – 77)/8.5 = 0.9412

 By using CDF function, we have find out that 82.67% of randomly chosen student
gets a grade below 85.
 Using the standard normal distribution table, the area/proportion to the left of z-
score 0.9412 is 0.8267.
 The probability that a randomly chosen student gets a grade below 85 on this exam
is 82.67%.
4.2 What is the probability that a randomly selected student scores between 65 and 87?

Sol:
z1 = (5 - 5) / 1.5 = 0
z2 = (5.5 - 5) / 1.5 = 0.33

 By using CDF function, we have find out that 80.12% that a randomly selected
student scores between 65 and 87
 Using the standard normal distribution table, the area/proportion to the left of z-
score -1.4 is 0.0790 and the area/proportion to the right of z-score 1.1765 is 0.8803
 Therefore, probability that a randomly selected student score between 65 and 87
0.8803 - 0.0790 = 0.8013 or approximately 80.13%.

4.3 What should be the passing cut-off so that 75% of the students clear the exam?

Sol:
The passing cut-off so that 75% of the students clear the exam should be 71.27

Problem 5:

Zingaro stone printing is a company that specializes in printing images or patterns on

polished or unpolished stones. However, for the optimum level of printing of the image the
stone surface has to have a Brinell's hardness index of at least 150. Recently, Zingaro has
received a batch of polished and unpolished stones from its clients. Use the data provided
to answer the following (assuming a 5% significance level)
 
5.1 Earlier experience of Zingaro with this particular client is favorable as the stone surface
was found to be of adequate hardness. However, Zingaro has reason to believe now that
the unpolished stones may not be suitable for printing. Do you think Zingaro is justified in
thinking so?

The null hypothesis in this case the stone surface has to have a Brinell's hardness index of
at least 150.
Hence H0: μ ≥ 150 against HA: μ < 150
The level of significance at α = 0.05 = 5%

 The Unpolished mean 134.111

 t_statistic = -4.165 and pvalue = 4e-05
 Reject Null Hypothesis. True Mean is less than 150

As P value is less than significance level of 0.05 we reject null hypothesis and believe now
that the unpolished stones may not be suitable for printing

5.2 Is the mean hardness of the polished and unpolished stones the same?

The null hypothesis in this case is the mean hardness of the unploisehed and polisshed stones
are same. Hence H0: μA = μB against HA: μA != μB
  tstat -3.2422320501414053
 P value 0.0014655150194628353
 Reject Null Hypothesis

As P value is less than significance level of 0.05 we reject null hypothesis and declare that
mean hardness of the polished and unpolished stones are not same

Problem 6:

Aquarius health club, one of the largest and most popular cross-fit gyms in the country has
been advertising a rigorous program for body conditioning. The program is considered
successful if the candidate is able to do more than 5 push-ups, as compared to when he/she
enrolled in the program. Using the sample data provided can you conclude whether the
program is successful? (Consider the level of Significance as 5%)

Note that this is a problem of the paired-t-test. Since the claim is that the training will make
a difference of more than 5, the null and alternative hypotheses must be formed
accordingly.
# Step 1: Define null and alternative hypotheses
the null hypothesis states candidate is not able to do more than 5 push-ups, as compared to
when he/she enrolled in the program, μA <= μB
The alternative hypthesis states candidate is able to do more than 5 push-ups, as compared
to when he/she enrolled in the program, μA > μB
H0: μA - μB <= 5
HA: μA - μB > 5
Here, μA denotes the mean of body conditioning of the candidate after he/she enrolled in
the program and μB denotes the mean of body conditioning of the candidate before he/she
enrolled in the program.

# Step 2: Decide the significance level

Here we select α = 0.05 as given in the question.

# Step 3: Perform the Paired paired t-test statistic

1. Sample sizes for both samples are same.
2. We have two paired samples and we do not know the population standard deviation.
3. The sample is not a large sample, n > 30. So you use the t distribution and the tSTAT test
statistic for two sample paired test.
# Step 4: Calculate the p - value and test statistic

We use the scipy.stats.ttest_rel to calculate the T-test on TWO RELATED samples of scores.
This is a two-sided test for the null hypothesis that 2 related samples have identical average
(expected) values. Here we give the two sample observations as input. This function returns
t statistic and two-tailed p value.

tstat6 -19.323
p-value6 for one-tail: 1.1460209626255983e-35
 # p_value < 0.05 => alternative hypothesis:
they don't have the same mean at the 5% significance level

Problem 7:
Dental implant data: The hardness of metal implant in dental cavities depends on multiple
factors, such as the method of implant, the temperature at which the metal is treated, the
alloy used as well as on the dentists who may favour one method above another and may
work better in his/her favourite method. The response is the variable of interest.
1. Test whether there is any difference among the dentists on the implant hardness. State the
null and alternative hypotheses. Note that both types of alloys cannot be considered
together. You must state the null and alternative hypotheses separately for the two types of
alloys.?
2. Before the hypotheses may be tested, state the required assumptions. Are the assumptions
fulfilled? Comment separately on both alloy types.? 
3. Irrespective of your conclusion in 2, we will continue with the testing procedure. What do
you conclude regarding whether implant hardness depends on dentists? Clearly state your
conclusion. If the null hypothesis is rejected, is it possible to identify which pairs of dentists
differ?
4. Now test whether there is any difference among the methods on the hardness of dental
implant, separately for the two types of alloys. What are your conclusions? If the null
hypothesis is rejected, is it possible to identify which pairs of methods differ?
5. Now test whether there is any difference among the temperature levels on the hardness of
dental implant, separately for the two types of alloys. What are your conclusions? If the null
hypothesis is rejected, is it possible to identify which levels of temperatures differ?
6. Consider the interaction effect of dentist and method and comment on the interaction plot,
separately for the two types of alloys?
7. Now consider the effect of both factors, dentist, and method, separately on each alloy.
What do you conclude? Is it possible to identify which dentists are different, which methods
are different, and which interaction levels are different?