Talk:20.109(S11):Wrap-up analysis and modelingb (Day8): Difference between revisions
(→W/F) |
(→T/R) |
||
Line 29: | Line 29: | ||
| week 4 data only, -/- and AHL data may be unreliable due to saturation | | week 4 data only, -/- and AHL data may be unreliable due to saturation | ||
|- | |- | ||
| | |Pink | ||
| | |20008 (59%), 1061 (3.1%), 16659 (49.1%), 33903 | ||
| | |7046 (3292%), 6083 (2842%), 265 (4.3%), 214 | ||
| | |week four day, modified data probably unreliable (used Green W/F design) | ||
|- | |- | ||
| | | |
Revision as of 21:37, 9 April 2011
T/R
Please use the following order for all data: IPTG, IPTG/AHL, -/-, AHL.
Data should be written as: # units (% of AHL case). You can indicate the standard deviation of the data if it is known. (You may include one more significant figure than you believe (or not) for your classmates' reference, but don't go overboard!)
In notes you can explain if you are using week 1, week 4, or both data sets for the original system. Also specify which team's design you used, if your own did not produce colonies. Finally, definitely mention if some of your data points are untrustworthy due to saturation.
Group | Miller units and % maximal (original) | Miller units and % maximal (modified) | Notes |
---|---|---|---|
Sample | 1320 (7.0%), 1470 (7.8%), 12,740 ± 20 (67%), 18,900 ± 300 | 700 (3.6%), 1280 (6.5%), 9100 ± 260 (46%), 19,600 ± 350 | week 4 data only |
Blue | 1146.95 (3.4%), 1273.3 (3.8%), 31696.1 (95%), 33278.3 | 6111.7 (1176.6%), 6252.9 (1203.7%), 423.4 (81.5%), 519.5 | week 4 data only |
Yellow | 2015(2.5%), 1843(2.3%), 61790(77%), 79800 | 27960(19%), 29930(20%), 138940(94%), 147470 | week 4 data only, -/- and AHL data may be unreliable due to saturation |
Pink | 20008 (59%), 1061 (3.1%), 16659 (49.1%), 33903 | 7046 (3292%), 6083 (2842%), 265 (4.3%), 214 | week four day, modified data probably unreliable (used Green W/F design) |
W/F
Please use the following order for all data: IPTG, IPTG/AHL, -/-, AHL.
Data should be written as: # units (% of AHL case). You can indicate the standard deviation of the data if it is known. (You may include one more significant figure than you believe (or not) for your classmates' reference, but don't go overboard!)
In notes you can explain if you are using week 1, week 4, or both data sets for the original system. Also specify which team's design you used, if your own did not produce colonies. Finally, definitely mention if some of your data points are untrustworthy due to saturation.
Group | Miller units and % maximal (original) | Miller units and % maximal (modified) | Notes |
---|---|---|---|
Sample | 1320 (7.0%), 1470 (7.8%), 12,740 ± 20 (67%), 18,900 ± 300 | 700 (3.6%), 1280 (6.5%), 9100 ± 260 (46%), 19,600 ± 350 | week 4 data only |
Yellow | 10,300 ± 200 (5.0%), 9,990 ± 700 (4.9%), 171,000 ± 52,000 (84%), 205,000 ± 730 | 1,560 ± 200 (0.92%), 1,720 ± 110 (1.0%), 73,200 ± 6900 (43%), 169,000 ± 900 | -/- and AHL data may be unreliable due to saturation =( Week 4 data only |
Purple | 294 (2.0%), 431 (2.9%), 12778 (86.2%), 14820 | 53 (0.87%), 49 (0.81%), 4088 (68.1%), 6001 | week four data only |
Green | 1654 (2.82%), 11360 (19.38%), 13424 (22.90%), 58617 (100%) | 4015 (4.42%), 19094 (21.04%), 19835 (21.86%), 90739 (100%) | week 4 data only |