major error was in lines 176 to 183 of case_study_comparisons. We were reading in the CA data as NY data. This has been fixed with 2fb379d2f263081d1bc799033c05ca72dcb9f9bc
Removed the extra z-tests (we only need to do 1 test, the conf.level option is only used for the confidence interval construction and we don't use that.
Reordered the code to make it easier to cross-ref with the tables.
I think the best way to test this is to just
stash, commit or discard any chanages
Pull this branch
knit the case_study_comparisions.R file.
As long as it runs, please approve. If numbers don't match, we'll continue to troubleshoot.
@Ardini-NOAA
major error was in lines 176 to 183 of case_study_comparisons. We were reading in the CA data as NY data. This has been fixed with 2fb379d2f263081d1bc799033c05ca72dcb9f9bc
Removed the extra z-tests (we only need to do 1 test, the
conf.leveloption is only used for the confidence interval construction and we don't use that.Reordered the code to make it easier to cross-ref with the tables.
I think the best way to test this is to just
As long as it runs, please approve. If numbers don't match, we'll continue to troubleshoot.