Rank: 698 based on 202 downloads (last 30 days) and 2 files submitted
photo

Ahmed Ben Saïda

E-mail
Company/University
Faculté des Sciences Economiques et de Gestion

Personal Profile:
Professional Interests:

 

Watch this Author's files

 

Files Posted by Ahmed View all
Updated   File Tags Downloads
(last 30 days)
Comments Rating
24 Sep 2014 Chaos test A test for chaotic dynamics of a noisy time series based on the Lyapunov exponent. Author: Ahmed Ben Saïda chaos, lyapunov exponent, bifurcation, time series, noisy time series 61 0
18 Jun 2014 Shapiro-Wilk and Shapiro-Francia normality tests. Shapiro-Wilk & Shapiro-Francia parametric hypothesis test of composite normality. Author: Ahmed Ben Saïda statistics, probability, normality test, hypothesis test, composite, algorithm 141 12
  • 4.88889
4.9 | 10 ratings
Comments and Ratings by Ahmed
Updated File Comments Rating
23 Mar 2013 Shapiro-Wilk and Shapiro-Francia normality tests. Shapiro-Wilk & Shapiro-Francia parametric hypothesis test of composite normality. Author: Ahmed Ben Saïda

To answer all questions:
- the kurtosis (line 119) does not modify the power of the test, it's barely used to help choosing between Shapiro-Wilk and Shapiro-Francia method. Moreover, it's better to use the sample kurtosis 'kurtosis(x)'.
- When posing x=norminv((1:9)/10)), x here is not normally distributed, it represents the inverse of the CDF which is not normal by definition. So if you want to test its power you can compute x=normrnd(mu, sigma, n, 1), where you can choose the size of your sample (n) and perform the test.

Comments and Ratings on Ahmed's Files View all
Updated File Comment by Comments Rating
20 Sep 2013 Shapiro-Wilk and Shapiro-Francia normality tests. Shapiro-Wilk & Shapiro-Francia parametric hypothesis test of composite normality. Author: Ahmed Ben Saïda Naseri, Hassan

23 Mar 2013 Shapiro-Wilk and Shapiro-Francia normality tests. Shapiro-Wilk & Shapiro-Francia parametric hypothesis test of composite normality. Author: Ahmed Ben Saïda Ben Saïda, Ahmed

To answer all questions:
- the kurtosis (line 119) does not modify the power of the test, it's barely used to help choosing between Shapiro-Wilk and Shapiro-Francia method. Moreover, it's better to use the sample kurtosis 'kurtosis(x)'.
- When posing x=norminv((1:9)/10)), x here is not normally distributed, it represents the inverse of the CDF which is not normal by definition. So if you want to test its power you can compute x=normrnd(mu, sigma, n, 1), where you can choose the size of your sample (n) and perform the test.

22 Oct 2012 Shapiro-Wilk and Shapiro-Francia normality tests. Shapiro-Wilk & Shapiro-Francia parametric hypothesis test of composite normality. Author: Ahmed Ben Saïda de Goeij, Willem-Jan

Can you explain the following?
x is normally distributed.
If I perform a 2 tailed test, your function rejects the null hypothesis.

x = norminv((1:9)/10);
[h,p,w]=swtest(x,0.05,0)
h =
1
p =
0.0028
w =
0.9925

19 Oct 2012 Shapiro-Wilk and Shapiro-Francia normality tests. Shapiro-Wilk & Shapiro-Francia parametric hypothesis test of composite normality. Author: Ahmed Ben Saïda Deb, Sav

Sorry, what is the usefulness of tail option? When to use 1,0 or -1 value?
Thank you for help

13 Mar 2012 Shapiro-Wilk and Shapiro-Francia normality tests. Shapiro-Wilk & Shapiro-Francia parametric hypothesis test of composite normality. Author: Ahmed Ben Saïda Jannick

Contact us