Re: [office-formula] CHITEST definition

[Eike Rathke <erack@sun.com>]

Hi,

On Thursday, 2007-03-08 21:36:18 +0100, Eike Rathke wrote:

> The CHITEST function still lacks a definition, anyone?

While defining that, I stumbled over some odd Excel behavior. Excel
allows data arrays (actual and expected values) of different dimensions
as long as they have the same number of elements
(rows_actual*cols_actual==rows_expected*cols_expected). To me that
doesn't make sense and I wouldn't know how to fit that into some
Chi-square formula other than treating the entire data set as one and
not in different columns. It especially doesn't fit into the formula
that's given in Ecma/Excel. IMHO.

Furthermore, Ecma/Excel's definition of degrees of freedom looks weird,
for rows>1 and cols>1 they say it would be (rows-1)*(cols-1). Why?!?

Can anyone shed some light on this?

  Eike

-- 
Automatic string conversions considered dangerous. They are the GOTO statements
of spreadsheets.  --Robert Weir on the OpenDocument formula subcommittee's list.