- Many data-analytical procedures share one version or another of the same underlying conceptual model:
data = predictable component + unpredictable component; or
data = signal + noise; or
data = smooth component + irregular component; or
data = common variation + unique variation.
For a) regression analysis, b) analysis of variance, c) nonparameteric regression, and d) principal components or factor analysis, describe the particular version of that common conceptual model that applies, and why that conceptual model makes sense given the goals of the analysis. Note that you shouldn’t necessarily try to match the three analyses with one or another of different versions of the conceptual model–those are just examples, and there could be other ways of describing the basic model that might work better in each case. Or it could be the case that two analyses share the same model. It might be useful to make a table first, before writing; if so, the whole answer should fit on a page. (2 pts.)
- Describe the general context in which multiple linear regression analysis is applicable. (What is it used for? Are there any assumptions that underlie its use? How is it implemented in practice? (And don’t just say, “by using the lm() function…”!) (2 pts.)
- Many of the statistics we’ve seen, like the coefficient of variation, correlation coefficient, t-test, and others, are fractions, with a term in the numerator and a term in the denominator. For as many statistics you can think of, characterize in words what the quantities in the numerator and denomentor represent, and then comment why that particular arrangement (something in the numerator, something in the denominator) makes sense in general. Again, an efficient way of answering this question might be a table and a sentence or two. (2 pts.)
- Suppose you are in charge of the data-analysis component of a project that generates one or more data sets (or data frames), that include the following kinds of variables (i.e. columns):
some kind of text identification label (like the abbreviations of the weather station names in the Oregon climate data set);
locational information (e.g. latitude and longitude, or x and y);
one more response variables (i.e. variables that you would like to “explain” or predict);
several candidate predictor variables;
one or more factor (or group membership) variables (like the Reach variable in the Summit Cr. data set) that identify which group a particular observation comes from or is assigned to.
Describe an overall strategy for making sense of this data set. What kind of plots or visualizations might you apply (and why)? What kind of analyses (and why)? (3 pts.)
The greatest of which was most definitely the Emergency Banking act. Despite the need to pass such legislature, congress was surprisingly divided. There were numerous meetings between republicans and democrats to figure out a common solution, unfortunately they couldn’t. Instead focus was shifted to the state governors offices, where the two governors of New York and Chicago, Americas financial and banking hubs, came up with the idea of a moratorium, a break to banking. On the eve of FDRs inauguration, with the country in economic meltdown, all banks were closed under the order of the president, giving the government those 3 days without panic to find a solution so that the banks could reopen safely. The Emergency Banking Act stipulated that all banks got a year to divorce themselves from their investment houses, developing separate corporate identities. Following the 3 day moratorium the senate voted on the bill, and at 8:36 pm. FDR officially passed it. The act gave the president the legal right to declare a bank holiday, as well as entrusting in the secretary of the treasury to decide which banks were worth saving and which were too far gone. More or less giving the secretary the power of life or death over banks. Unfortunately this did not sit well with everyone, with the leftist wanting the banks to be nationalized. There were some who might have supported that idea, but not FDR. FDR wished to save the existing system, not kill it. The solution came for the ailing economy came from two men, Carter Glass, and Henry Steagall. The two politicians had been interested in banking reform for a long time, they had been pushing for reform under Hoovers administration but their demands were not taken seriously. Therefore, in 1933, unsatisfied with the Emergency Banking Act, they sought further reform. Their theory was that if you separate a banks commercial banking activities from the investment banking activities, the bank would be forced to be more conservative with its overall activities. Then with the banks in check, attention was turned to the millions of Americans who had lost all of their life savings during the crash. What made the most sense was something called the Federal Deposit Insurance Act, the FDIC. The theory was that in efforts to avoid the runs on banks, the insurance system would tell depositors that the federal government, through the FDIC, would reimburse up to a certain amount of money lost money during the crisis. This fund would be built up by using small taxes. However this was not the first time a system of this nature had been attempted, something FDR was aware of and unhappy with. All efforts to create a state level FDIC had failed in the past due to poor management, underfunding, and rampant corruption. The Glass-Steagall Act, under the auspices of the FDIC, initially sought to cap the reimbursements at $1000. However, Arthur Vanderburg, a senator from Michigan, felt as if the $1000 was too low, with many people losing much more than that. Then began a serious of back and forths, with one side calling for $1000 to be the list and the other $2500. Ultimately, FDR felt that $2500 was too high, too much liability on this corporation. Although this did not happen over night, they eventually reached a deal that created two parts to the Act. The preliminary part, stipulated that there would be a temporary release of funds on January 1st 1934 with the cap set at $1000. The second part of the plan was set to kick off on July 1st 1934, with the $2500 set as the ceiling. This was necessary because the white house still had to figure out how all of this would work. The temporary plan was put in to assure the people, the very creation of the FDIC, and the backing by FDR of the Glass-Steagall Act is what shows Americans that the banking system will survive and hopefully thrive. Ultimately, this led to the end of the bank runs that crippled the economy, the panic seemed to stop overnight. The federal system, with FDR at the helm, superimposed on the top, takes the pressure off the state governments. The federal reserve had their power broadened, they now had the power to interfere in a banks inner workings if they felt they were acting in a corrupt or doltish manner. For the moment, following the passing of the Emergency Banking Act as well as the Glass-Steagall Act, FDR thinks the financial meltdown is over, he wanted to move onto other issues of magnitude. Glass-Steagall provided security, at the low end of the spectrum>GET ANSWER