Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 577

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Probability Tables for Individual Comparisons by Ranking Methods

Wilcoxon, Frank·1947·Biometrics

Abstract

In previous papers [3] [4] a ranking method has been described for the rapid approximate determination of the significance of differences between two treatments, when the experimental data consists of unpaired replications, paired replications, or replications occurring in two or more groups. Brief tables were given which furnished the rank totals for the 0.05%o, 0.02% and 0.01% level of significance. These tables were prepared by making use of certain properties of the partitions of numbers, but the method becomes impractical with larger numbers of replicates. A recent paper by Mann and Whitney [1] describes a similar test and gives probability tables covering the range from 3 to 8 replicates per treatment, including the case of unequal numbers of unpaired replicates under the two treatments. These authors tabulated the probabilities against the serial number of possible rank totals, 0-1-2 .... U, instead of the rank total itself. Their tables give probabilities for one tail of the distribution only.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2307/3001946

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 1 references

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Wilcoxon, F.
Venue
Biometrics
Publisher
JSTOR
Published
1947-09
Volume
3
Issue
3
Pages
119
ISSN
0006-341X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2330406605
Cited by
577
References
1
FWCI
1.08
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.