Paper
Table 1;
Table 2;
Table 2;
Table 3;
Table 3;
Correlation coefficient formula;
Table 1; correlation coefficient = 0.396078212
Table 2; correlation coefficient = 0.601557088
Table 3; correlation coefficient = 0.509917729
Working out;
6) Use your results to assess whether combined data from the whole class matches the “ideals” of the Vitruvian man more closely than measurements based entirely on yourself. When assessing the combined results, to that of the results of the entire class, I determined that the results of the entire class are less accurate in matching the ideals of the Vitruvian man. This is due to the outliers. When looking at the statement, the foot is the 7th part of a man, there are 2 main outliers, having a foot size of 22cm and height of 150cm and a foot length of 21.5cm and a height or 165cm is inaccurate with the statements put forward by the Vitruvian man. This is also evident when looking at the median regression line on each graph, with a limited amount of dots touching each line.
When looking at my own results, it was also easier to determine whether I complied with the statements. Although some of my own statements were false, I complied more accurately than that of other student’s data.
7) Evaluate this claim “The Vitruvian man gives us an accurate method for predicting biometric data about someone, even when only one or two measurements of them are available. For example we can predict the height of someone quite accurately from their shoe size or their hand span”
This statement is correct. Although in some cases, some may not be exactly within the limits of each statement. But majority of people are. For example, my shoe size is an 8 in women’s, making my foot length approximately 22.7cm’s. 7 x 22.7cm = 158.9cm. My actual height is 164cm. Although there is a margin for error, being that with the naked eye, a human can only measure to a certain degree. This makes room for human error. Also,
Table 2;
Table 2;
Table 3;
Table 3;
Correlation coefficient formula;
Table 1; correlation coefficient = 0.396078212
Table 2; correlation coefficient = 0.601557088
Table 3; correlation coefficient = 0.509917729
Working out;
6) Use your results to assess whether combined data from the whole class matches the “ideals” of the Vitruvian man more closely than measurements based entirely on yourself. When assessing the combined results, to that of the results of the entire class, I determined that the results of the entire class are less accurate in matching the ideals of the Vitruvian man. This is due to the outliers. When looking at the statement, the foot is the 7th part of a man, there are 2 main outliers, having a foot size of 22cm and height of 150cm and a foot length of 21.5cm and a height or 165cm is inaccurate with the statements put forward by the Vitruvian man. This is also evident when looking at the median regression line on each graph, with a limited amount of dots touching each line.
When looking at my own results, it was also easier to determine whether I complied with the statements. Although some of my own statements were false, I complied more accurately than that of other student’s data.
7) Evaluate this claim “The Vitruvian man gives us an accurate method for predicting biometric data about someone, even when only one or two measurements of them are available. For example we can predict the height of someone quite accurately from their shoe size or their hand span”
This statement is correct. Although in some cases, some may not be exactly within the limits of each statement. But majority of people are. For example, my shoe size is an 8 in women’s, making my foot length approximately 22.7cm’s. 7 x 22.7cm = 158.9cm. My actual height is 164cm. Although there is a margin for error, being that with the naked eye, a human can only measure to a certain degree. This makes room for human error. Also,