> > The accuracy of their functions may leave a bit to be desired, though.
> > I've just starting using Excel 5 and compared a simple linear regression
> > with the results from Systat. There was a good bit of difference in the
> > sums of squares. For instance Excel gave a residual SS of 1501.088 vs
> > Systat's 1500.565. The resulting f-ratio was 364.1975 vs 364.300. I
> > think I would tend to believe Systat's results more :-)
> > Dr. Warren L. Kovach Internet: warrenk at cix.compulink.co.uk> >
Sorry I'm picking this up a bit late (I was moving) but am I missing something? Could someone explain to me why these trivial differences are of any practical signficance? I appreciate the point that one might want to know what algorithm a statistical package was claiming to use, but I can't see that the actual results obtained have "a good bit of difference" between them. I mean we're talking statistics here, not physics.
Institute of Psychiatry Janet: dcurtis at UK.AC.MRC.HGMP
Denmark Hill Elsewhere: dcurtis at HGMP.MRC.AC.UK
London SE5 8AF
Tel 071-603 5411