Skewness in SPSS - SPSS answers differently in multiple PC - statistics

I'm wanna calculate the Skewness of 10 data(number); But SPSS calculate it differently in multiple computer!!!
The Numbers:
239.00,
176.00,
235.00,
217.00,
234.00,
216.00,
318.00,
190.00,
181.00,
225.00.
I followed this steps:
Analysis--->Descriptive Statistics--->Frequencies--->Statistics--->Skewness--->Continue--->Ok
Answer of SPSS in one pc:
Answer of SPSS in another pc:
I really don't know why? And what should I've done?
Please help me... I need it a lot.
Thanks.

I think that you have the values set to format differently on the second computer, so you are seeing the rounded value. Double click the table, and click in the skewness cell to see the full precision value (or use Format > Cell Properties) to get more decimals. Also, you can compare the mean and variance to make sure that the data is really the same on both.

Related

Format integers as fraction

I have a list of fractions in Excel which I want to format as fractions, including integers. However, by default Excel formats integers as integers which is understandable.
Is there any way to force Excel to format, say, 4/4 as 4/4 instead of 1?
I need it to be stores as values and not as text, so '4/4 wont work. As I need to average a bunch of values from it afterwards.
Apparently I'm the first person ever to take issue with this, because google provides absolutely no help whatsoever :o
Yes, use a custom number format:
?/4
I don't believe what you are trying to accomplish is doable outright, as fractions are really division problems. However, with some formula trickery, you may be able to get something that will work for you.
If you place '7/8 in cell A1 and then use the following formula in cell B1
=DECIMAL(MID(A1,1,FIND("/",A1,1)-1),10)/DECIMAL(MID(A1,FIND("/",A1,1)+1,LEN(A1)),10)
The cell will display the decimal value of the "fraction", in this case 0.875 allowing you to change the denominator at will and still perform math functions.
This works because the formula slices up the "fraction" stored as text and converts it to a number and performs the math.

Excel changes a 3 decimal number to full number despite formatting options and even in a formula

A colleague of mine sent me their Excel sheet and asked me to take a look at it. The issue is that with a very specific number (56136.598), Excel is automatically extrapolating that number out to 10 decimal places completely regardless of the formatting options.
The cell displays the number to the correct 3 decimal places, but if you look at the number in the formula bar it displays all 10 decimal places. It even changes the number to 10 decimal places if I write the formula =round(56136.598,3) to =round(56136.5979999999,3).
Unfortunately, given the industry I am in, I need some explanation as to why this very specific number induces this change. It's not enough to just use a round or trunc function to lop it off at 3 decimal places, the fact that this number and this cell have a different set up then the rest of the parallel cell calculations is drawing some criticism. Has anyone ran into this before? I have tried it in Excel 2010 and 2019 and in new worksheets, same issue. It seems that excel refuses to accept the number at 3 decimal places and forcing an expansion to 10 decimal places on its own.
This is a normal behavior. See the image below where I just entered 56136,598 into the cell.
This happens due to the fact that Excel is a numeric calculation program and not an algebraic one. So it is a problem of precision. Also see Numeric precision in Microsoft Excel.
Excels results are not absolute but very close to correct. The difference between these to numbers is almost 0 (the difference is 0,0000000001).
And this is actually how most common calculators will act too (you just don't see that). It is just the nature of how calculators (and computers) work.
So there is nothing to worry about.
More about this: Understanding Floating Point Precision, aka “Why does Excel Give Me Seemingly Wrong Answers?”

How to convert decimal to binary in excel without using the engineering functions

I am trying to learn the fundamentals behind the conversion of binary to decimal/Hex/Oct. For now I am focusing on decimal to binary conversion, without the use of the engineering functions dec2bin. I haven't found much online regarding this.
Thus far I have figured out how to convert a cell with a positive decimal number inside of it into 8 boxes (8 bits) making up 0's and 1's.
The way I have done this is using the MOD and INT functions.
First bit with formula
2nd Bit with formula
In the above two images I show how I manually calculate the process of converting from decimal to binary. The question is, this is the long way of doing it and I would like help to make it so that it is simply two boxes; one with a decimal and the other with the binary, so that when I enter the decimal it is instantly calculated into the binary beside it, as demonstrated in picture 3.
decimal to binary short form
If anyone could help me understand how to make my formula work using just one cell instead of 8 separate and different formulaes, it would be appreciated.
Use CONCAT as an Array formula:
=CONCAT(INT(MOD(A3/2^(8-ROW($1:$8)),2)))
Being an array formula it must be confirmed with Ctrl-Shift-Enter instead of Enter when exiting edit mode.
CONCAT was introduced with Office 365 Excel.
If one does not have Concat, this can be done with TEXT and SUMPRODUCT:
=TEXT(SUMPRODUCT(INT(MOD(A3/2^(8-ROW($1:$8)),2))*(10^(8-ROW($1:$8)))),"00000000")

Excel/Statistics Issue

I have a homework assignment where I need to run 1000 simulations in excel using an exponential distribution. I'm not sure how to get excel to give me the data I need. This is the question (the first part, at least):
I've figured out how to use the exponential distribution formula in excel, but I can't get it to return any values greater than 1. I think it's just the nature of that function, but I can't figure out how to get Excel to display the simulated lifetimes of the components. Any help at all would be much appreciated.
with λ in cell N4, the formula =-1/$N$4*LN(1-RAND()) yields a random number from the exponential distribution with parameter λ
from http://www.tushar-mehta.com/publish_train/xl_vba_cases/0806%20generate%20random%20numbers.shtml

Round function (worksheet one) in Excel

Using Excel 2013, typing this into two cells yields different results.
=ROUND((10.45-10.00)/1,1) = 0.4
but
=ROUND(0.45/1,1) = 0.5
And I have no idea why this is the case. Anyone have an explanation?
Because Excel uses floating-point math, so results are not guaranteed to be exact. On my Excel 2013 installation, if I enter =10.45-10.00 in a cell, then change that cell to Number with 30 decimal places of precision, the actual answer is 0.449999999999999000000000000000. Since 0.44999... and 0.45 are on opposite sides of the rounding boundary, they round to one decimal place differently.
Edit See also this answer and the question and other answers, which go into much more detail about why Excel's math is inexact.
It looks like the top calculation is creating an infinitesimally small difference. To see this, pull the formula out of the ROUND function. Using the "Increase Decimal" button, expand both values to 15+ decimal places. You'll see that the top value is actually 0.449999999999999.
I have no idea why it actually does this.

Resources