Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Scribd
Upload
26 views6 pages

N Way Anova SAS SAmple

Uploaded by

kpfernandico.metslogistics

The document provides class level information and results from an analysis of variance (ANOVA) comparing pH levels across different process levels and treatment levels. Key points: - There are 5 process levels (GM, GMA, GMAC, GMS, GMSC) and 6 treatment levels (A, B, C, D, E, F). - The ANOVA model was statistically significant and the process levels and treatment levels helped explain differences in pH levels. - Post hoc comparisons showed several significant differences in pH levels between different process levels, but fewer significant differences between treatment levels. - In general, GM tended to have higher pH levels than other process levels, while levels A and B tended to have

Copyright:

© All Rights Reserved
Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
Download as pdf or txt

N Way Anova SAS SAmple

Uploaded by

kpfernandico.metslogistics
26 views6 pages
The document provides class level information and results from an analysis of variance (ANOVA) comparing pH levels across different process levels and treatment levels. Key points: - There are 5 process levels (GM, GMA, GMAC, GMS, GMSC) and 6 treatment levels (A, B, C, D, E, F). - The ANOVA model was statistically significant and the process levels and treatment levels helped explain differences in pH levels. - Post hoc comparisons showed several significant differences in pH levels between different process levels, but fewer significant differences between treatment levels. - In general, GM tended to have higher pH levels than other process levels, while levels A and B tended to have

Original Description:

Sample N Way Anova Result through SAS

Copyright

© © All Rights Reserved

Available Formats

PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

The document provides class level information and results from an analysis of variance (ANOVA) comparing pH levels across different process levels and treatment levels. Key points: - There are 5 process levels (GM, GMA, GMAC, GMS, GMSC) and 6 treatment levels (A, B, C, D, E, F). - The ANOVA model was statistically significant and the process levels and treatment levels helped explain differences in pH levels. - Post hoc comparisons showed several significant differences in pH levels between different process levels, but fewer significant differences between treatment levels. - In general, GM tended to have higher pH levels than other process levels, while levels A and B tended to have

Copyright:

© All Rights Reserved
Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
Download as pdf or txt
26 views6 pages

N Way Anova SAS SAmple

Uploaded by

kpfernandico.metslogistics
The document provides class level information and results from an analysis of variance (ANOVA) comparing pH levels across different process levels and treatment levels. Key points: - There are 5 process levels (GM, GMA, GMAC, GMS, GMSC) and 6 treatment levels (A, B, C, D, E, F). - The ANOVA model was statistically significant and the process levels and treatment levels helped explain differences in pH levels. - Post hoc comparisons showed several significant differences in pH levels between different process levels, but fewer significant differences between treatment levels. - In general, GM tended to have higher pH levels than other process levels, while levels A and B tended to have

Copyright:

© All Rights Reserved
Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
Download as pdf or txt
You are on page 1/ 6

Class Level Information

Class Levels Values

Process 5 GM GMA GMAC GMS GMSC


Treatment 6 ABCDEF

Number of Observations Read 90


Number of Observations Used 90

Dependent Variable: pH pH

Source DF Sum of Squares Mean Square F Value Pr > F


Model 29 4.14537264 0.14294388 15.80 <.0001
Error 60 0.54299496 0.00904992
Corrected Total 89 4.68836760

R-Square Coeff Var Root MSE pH Mean

0.884183 1.736517 0.095131 5.478267

Source DF Type I SS Mean Square F Value Pr > F


Process 4 3.95192728 0.98798182 109.17 <.0001
Treatment 5 0.17113421 0.03422684 3.78 0.0048

Process*Treatment 20 0.02231115 0.00111556 0.12 1.0000

Source DF Type III SS Mean Square F Value Pr > F


Process 4 3.95192728 0.98798182 109.17 <.0001
Treatment 5 0.17113421 0.03422684 3.78 0.0048
Process*Treatment 20 0.02231115 0.00111556 0.12 1.0000
Least Squares Means
Adjustment for Multiple Comparisons: Tukey

Process pH LSMEAN LSMEAN Number


GM 5.68185185 1
GMA 5.17074074 2
GMAC 5.29092593 3

GMS 5.56907407 4
GMSC 5.67874074 5

Least Squares Means for effect Process


Pr > |t| for H0: LSMean(i)=LSMean(j)

Dependent Variable: pH
i/j 1 2 3 4 5
1 <.0001 <.0001 0.0064 1.0000
2 <.0001 0.0031 <.0001 <.0001
3 <.0001 0.0031 <.0001 <.0001

4 0.0064 <.0001 <.0001 0.0086


5 1.0000 <.0001 <.0001 0.0086

Process pH LSMEAN 95% Confidence Limits


GM 5.681852 5.637000 5.726704
GMA 5.170741 5.125889 5.215593
GMAC 5.290926 5.246074 5.335778
Process pH LSMEAN 95% Confidence Limits
GMS 5.569074 5.524222 5.613926
GMSC 5.678741 5.633889 5.723593

Least Squares Means for Effect Process


i j Difference Between Means Simultaneous 95% Confidence Limits for LSMean(i)-LSMean(j)
1 2 0.511111 0.421927 0.600295

1 3 0.390926 0.301742 0.480110


1 4 0.112778 0.023594 0.201962
1 5 0.003111 -0.086073 0.092295
2 3 -0.120185 -0.209369 -0.031001
2 4 -0.398333 -0.487517 -0.309149
2 5 -0.508000 -0.597184 -0.418816
3 4 -0.278148 -0.367332 -0.188964
3 5 -0.387815 -0.476999 -0.298631
4 5 -0.109667 -0.198851 -0.020483
Least Squares Means
Adjustment for Multiple Comparisons: Tukey

Treatment pH LSMEAN LSMEAN Number


A 5.42224444 1
B 5.44466667 2
C 5.44022222 3
D 5.50802222 4
E 5.53000000 5
F 5.52444444 6

Least Squares Means for effect Treatment


Pr > |t| for H0: LSMean(i)=LSMean(j)

Dependent Variable: pH
i/j 1 2 3 4 5 6
1 0.9870 0.9953 0.1498 0.0332 0.0502
2 0.9870 1.0000 0.4586 0.1539 0.2116
3 0.9953 1.0000 0.3818 0.1170 0.1644
4 0.1498 0.4586 0.3818 0.9881 0.9969
5 0.0332 0.1539 0.1170 0.9881 1.0000
6 0.0502 0.2116 0.1644 0.9969 1.0000

Treatment pH LSMEAN 95% Confidence Limits


A 5.422244 5.373112 5.471377
Treatment pH LSMEAN 95% Confidence Limits
B 5.444667 5.395534 5.493799

C 5.440222 5.391089 5.489355


D 5.508022 5.458889 5.557155
E 5.530000 5.480867 5.579133
F 5.524444 5.475312 5.573577

Least Squares Means for Effect Treatment


i j Difference Between Means Simultaneous 95% Confidence Limits for LSMean(i)-LSMean(j)
1 2 -0.022422 -0.124681 0.079836

1 3 -0.017978 -0.120236 0.084281


1 4 -0.085778 -0.188036 0.016481
1 5 -0.107756 -0.210014 -0.005497

1 6 -0.102200 -0.204459 0.000058601


2 3 0.004444 -0.097814 0.106703
2 4 -0.063356 -0.165614 0.038903
2 5 -0.085333 -0.187592 0.016925
2 6 -0.079778 -0.182036 0.022481
3 4 -0.067800 -0.170059 0.034459
3 5 -0.089778 -0.192036 0.012481
3 6 -0.084222 -0.186481 0.018036
4 5 -0.021978 -0.124236 0.080281
4 6 -0.016422 -0.118681 0.085836
5 6 0.005556 -0.096703 0.107814

You might also like