The correlation coefficient must lie between -1 and +1 and so a correlation coefficient of 35 is a strong indication of a calculation error. If you meant 0.35, then it is a weak correlation.
"Strong" is very much a subjective term. Not only that, but it depends on expectations. In economics I would consider 70% to be a strong correlation, but for physics I would want more than 95% before I called the correlation strong!
There would be no definite correlation. It would just be a random correlation that would be all over the graph because there is no trend in hair color and weight. Your weight doesn't determine your hair color.
The temporal correlation would measure the similarity of one signal over time.
I would assume a negative correlation. More TV sets per home = less newspaper circulation.
The correlation coefficient must lie between -1 and +1 and so a correlation coefficient of 35 is a strong indication of a calculation error. If you meant 0.35, then it is a weak correlation.
"Strong" is very much a subjective term. Not only that, but it depends on expectations. In economics I would consider 70% to be a strong correlation, but for physics I would want more than 95% before I called the correlation strong!
No, The correlation can not be over 1. An example of a strong correlation would be .99
correlation is a technique of correlating two signals with each other and producing the third signal. In correlation if two different signals are used it is called cross correlation and if same signal is correlated with itself it is called as auto correlation.
This relationship is called the correlation between the amount of drivers education students have and the number of accidents they have. A positive correlation indicates that more education leads to fewer accidents, while a negative correlation would suggest the opposite.
correlation
There would be no definite correlation. It would just be a random correlation that would be all over the graph because there is no trend in hair color and weight. Your weight doesn't determine your hair color.
The temporal correlation would measure the similarity of one signal over time.
impossible
yes
I would assume a negative correlation. More TV sets per home = less newspaper circulation.
Since I am a constant, not a variable, there can be no correlation. The calculation would entail division by zero, which is not permitted.