Skip Navigation

Correction for MARITZ, Biometrika 55 (1) 83-100.
Biometrika 1968 55(1):268; doi:10.1093/biomet/55.1.268
© 1968 by Biometrika Trust
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by ALLING, D. W.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

CORRECTION

Correction

Biometrika (1966), 53, 73–84: ‘ Closed sequential tests for binomial probabilities’

DAVID W. ALLING

I am indebted to Dr L. S. Nelson for informing me of the following inaccuracies in Table 3, p. 83. Spicer's test, power function: {theta} = 0.65, 0.75; for 0.404, 0.809 read respectively 0.441, 0.828; average sample number: {theta} = 0.2–0.8; for 5.4, 6.2, 8.5, 12.3, 16.8, 18.8, 16.5 read respectively 5.0, 7.0, 10.1, 14.0, 17.7, 18.6, 16.0.

Also there are several errors in notation:

P. 78. Four lines below Fig. 2, for read ; on the next two lines and one line from the foot, for read . Second and third lines (foot), right-hand side, for n, read n – d– 1.

P. 79. Line 2,

for read

and on line 5, for read

P.82. Line 22, for read ;

line 23, for read


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.