On the Comparison of the Welch Test and the Single-Stage Test a Simulation Study

Ekiz, Meltem; Gamgam, Hamza

doi:10.1501/commua1_0000000189

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 10 publications

(12 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…One of the most recurring issues with these particular failures in ANOVA is due to the variability between data, which implies non-homogeneity between variances. When a problem of this type is identified it is recommended the use of Welch's ANOVA, which is applied in conditions where variances are not equal (Welch 1951;Ekiz and Gamgam 2007;Yigit and Gokpinar 2010).…”

Section: 5statistical Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

Grass Reference Lysimetric Evapotranspiration Measurements Compared to Satellite Data Observations

Gomes,

Campos,

Pai

2023

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We present one of the first research work for the study site (Botucatu-SP, Brazil) that compares in-situ grass reference evapotranspiration measurements obtained by weighing lysimetry technique with estimated data from this same parameter by the use of satellites. Data from two datasets available at the Google Earth Engine platform were used to compare monthly average values of reference evapotranspiration (ET0): 1. FLDAS (Famine Early Warning Systems Network (FEWS NET) Land Data Assimilation System); 2. MOD16A2.006 (Terra Net Evapotranspiration 8-Day Global 500m). Statistical analyses were carried out to analyze statistical variability between the compared data. At a 5% significance level, the test for homogeneity of variances (Bartlett’s test) indicated that the variances cannot be considered homogeneous (p-value of 4.3%); the Normality test (Shapiro-Wilk’s test) indicated that the observed data follow a normal distribution (p-value of 62.4%); the analysis of variance (ANOVA; Welch Test) with the F-Snedecor’s test indicated at a 5% significance level that the observed mean values do not differ from each other (p-value of 34.5%; Fcalc < F). Annual ET0 average values and their respective standard deviations are presented here: 2.3 ± 1.1 mm.day-1 (Lysimeter); 2.7 ± 0.8 mm.day-1 (MOD16A2.006); 3.2 ± 1.7 mm.day-1 (FLDAS); the coefficient of variation obtained was of 45.7%. Estimated data from MOD16A2.006 dataset overestimates lysimetric measurements by 8% (R² = 0.94), which we consider to be an exceptional approximation between estimated and measured ET0, whereas estimated data obtained from the FLDAS dataset overestimates lysimetric measurements by 33% (R² = 0.90).

show abstract

Section: 5statistical Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

Grass Reference Lysimetric Evapotranspiration Measurements Compared to Satellite Data Observations

Gomes,

Campos,

Pai

2023

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

On the Comparison of the Welch Test and the Single-Stage Test a Simulation Study

Abstract: C o m m u n .Fa c .S c i.U n iv .A n k .S e rie s A 1 Vo lu m e 5 6 , N u m b e r 2 , P a g e s 5 1 -6 1 (2 0 0 7 ) IS S N 1 3 0 3 -5 9 9 1

Cited by 1 publication

References 10 publications

Grass Reference Lysimetric Evapotranspiration Measurements Compared to Satellite Data Observations

Grass Reference Lysimetric Evapotranspiration Measurements Compared to Satellite Data Observations

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About