3 ms·
Because there are only two stats of note in the post, and they are 0.3% and 0.1%. That kind of difference doesn't make for useful graphs, does it?
by RustyRussell 14y ago
Because there are only two stats of note in the post, and they are 0.3% and 0.1%. That kind of difference doesn't make for useful graphs, does it?
- baq 14y agomost of the text could be replaced by a bar chart.
- misnome 14y agoThey did 40 runs of compilations (10 each, twice). At the very least, a scatter or bar graph would be helpful, as it would let you see the data distribution (those numbers are good as uninterpretable on their own). Saying that, 40 isn't very many times to draw statistical conclusions so you'd probably need more data.
- aaronharnly 14y agoI think a histogram or boxplot might be more appropriate to show the distribution. A scatter plot isn't appropriate for data whose independent variable is categorical (unless you jitter), and a bar plot (unless a histogram) would just show the means, wouldn't it?