Why Is It Not Possible In Example 81 On Page

Why Is It Not Possible In Example 81 On Page

In the context of statistical inference and confidence intervals, it is impossible to achieve 100% confidence in estimating a population parameter like the mean. This is fundamentally due to the nature of probability and the inherent uncertainty in sampling. When we construct a confidence interval, we are stating that with a certain level of confidence (e.g., 95%), the interval will contain the true population parameter. Achieving 100% confidence would imply absolute certainty, meaning the interval would always contain the true mean regardless of the sample, which is practically impossible without examining the entire population.

Specifically, when a sample is used to estimate a population mean, the interval calculated depends on sample data and the variability inherent in sampling. Since sampling variability can never be completely eliminated—no matter how large the sample—the confidence level less than 100% acknowledges the possibility that the interval might not include the true population mean. In Example 8.1, the goal was to estimate the population mean from a sample, but with only a sample and no entire population data, it cannot be guaranteed with absolute certainty that the interval encompasses the true mean. The only way to be 100% confident would be to analyze the entire population, which is often impractical or impossible.

Paper For Above instruction

Understanding why it is not possible to attain 100% confidence in statistical estimates requires a close examination of the principles of probability and sampling theory. Confidence intervals are inherently probabilistic, reflecting the uncertainty present in sampling. They are constructed so that, over many samples, a specified proportion (e.g., 95%) of such intervals would contain the true population parameter. This construction relies on the sampling distribution, which describes how sample means vary from the true population mean.

At the core, the concept of confidence levels is tied to the idea of repeated sampling and the behavior of the estimator. When we say we are 95% confident, it means that if we were to take many samples and compute an interval from each, approximately 95% of those intervals would include the true mean. Conversely, there is always a 5% chance that a specific interval does not contain the true mean. As we attempt to increase confidence to 100%, we are demanding that the interval contains the true mean in every possible sampling scenario, which contradicts the probabilistic foundation of these methods.

The limitation stems from the fact that the true population mean is a fixed but unknown parameter. Sample data are subject to variability, and any interval derived from a sample is an estimate. Because of this variability, there's an inherent chance that the interval might not include the true mean. Even with extremely large samples, the probability of the interval capturing the true mean approaches 100%, but it cannot be guaranteed with absolute certainty without including the entire population data.

Therefore, in example 8.1 on page 256, the lack of certainty to 100% confidence is rooted in these fundamental principles. If one claims 100% confidence, it effectively means the interval must be the entire real line or the entire population, which defeats the purpose of statistical inference. The trade-off in confidence level reflects a balance between precision and certainty, but absolute certainty remains theoretically and practically unattainable in inferential statistics.

References

• Casella, G., & Berger, R. L. (2002). Statistical Inference, 2nd Edition. Duxbury.
• Moore, D. S., McCabe, G. P., & Craig, B. A. (2009). Introduction to the Practice of Statistics. W.H. Freeman.
• Weiss, N. A. (2012). Introductory Statistics. Pearson.
• Devore, J. L. (2015). Probability and Statistics for Engineering and the Sciences. Cengage Learning.
• Freund, J. E., & Walpole, R. E. (1980). Mathematical Statistics. Prentice-Hall.
• Rosenbaum, P. R. (2002). Observational Studies. Springer.
• Newbold, P., Carlson, W. L., & Thorne, B. (2013). Statistics for Business and Economics. Pearson.
• Fisher, R. A. (1925). Statistical Methods for Research Workers. Oliver & Boyd.
• Hogg, R. V., & Tanis, E. A. (2006). Probability and Statistical Inference. Pearson.
• Agresti, A., & Franklin, C. (2013). Statistics: The Art and Science of Learning from Data. Pearson.