Revision as of 10:25, 24 July 2014 edit Hroðulf (talk \| contribs) Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers 14,829 edits ongoing merge discussion moved to bottom - fix error in earlier reply ← Previous edit		Revision as of 23:17, 23 August 2014 edit undo Elxala (talk \| contribs) 17 edits →Why "naive?" Next edit →
Line 529: :Feel free to edit the article to make these things more clear. :--[[User:Hro%C3%B0ulf\|Hroðulf]] (or Hrothulf) ([[User talk:Hro%C3%B0ulf\|Talk]]) 13:27, 23 July 2014 (UTC) Usually the term naive is used if it is the definition formula and its calculation using it is more laborious than doing it in other way. The formula called naive in the article is none of them. It is not the formula that defines variance and it is not laborious but simplifies a lot the calculation. The only problem with the formula is actually a problem of the float point arithmetic limitations. A small change by computing shifted data fixes the the problem. (see reference 2 T.F.Chan, G.H. Golub and R.J. LeVeque "3 Computations with shifted data"). In this article (ref 2) the formula (called textbook) is recommended in certain conditions and variations. So the use of the algorithm is far away from "should not be used in practice" as stated in the Wikipedia article. [[User:Elxala\|Elxala]] ([[User talk:Elxala\|talk]]) 23:17, 23 August 2014 (UTC) == Merge discussion ==

Talk:Algorithms for calculating variance: Difference between revisions