In statistics, this is the symbol for the "Variance"
yes, it can be smaller, equal or larger to the true value of the population varience.
It is a biased estimator. S.R.S leads to a biased sample variance but i.i.d random sampling leads to a unbiased sample variance.
No. Well not exactly. The square of the standard deviation of a sample, when squared (s2) is an unbiased estimate of the variance of the population. I would not call it crude, but just an estimate. An estimate is an approximate value of the parameter of the population you would like to know (estimand) which in this case is the variance.
16
the small greek letter sigma squared.
No, it is biased.
You cannot prove it because it is not true.The expected value of the sample variance is the population variance but that is not the same as the two measures being the same.
It means you can take a measure of the variance of the sample and expect that result to be consistent for the entire population, and the sample is a valid representation for/of the population and does not influence that measure of the population.
(Population) variance = 6.4664
In statistics, this is the symbol for the "Variance"
The n-1 indicates that the calculation is being expanded from a sample of a population to the entire population. Bessel's correction(the use of n − 1 instead of n in the formula) is where n is the number of observations in a sample: it corrects the bias in the estimation of the population variance, and some (but not all) of the bias in the estimation of the population standard deviation. That is, when estimating the population variance and standard deviation from a sample when the population mean is unknown, the sample variance is a biased estimator of the population variance, and systematically underestimates it.
yes, it can be smaller, equal or larger to the true value of the population varience.
1
It is a biased estimator. S.R.S leads to a biased sample variance but i.i.d random sampling leads to a unbiased sample variance.
Ti
= congruent sign