Comparing Two Population Means Comparing Two Population Means Outline Two populations Comparing Two MeansConfidence Intervals Hypothesis Tests An experiment What happens if the variances aren’t equal? Overview Previously, the focus was on a 'reference' value and tests around it. Example: Testing if the body weight of the US adult population has changed over time.Null Hypothesis (H 0 : µ = 177 H_0 : µ = 177 H 0 : µ = 177 lbs) Alternative Hypothesis (H A : µ ≠ 177 H_A : µ \neq 177 H A : µ = 177 lbs) Two Populations Many questions involve comparing two different populations. Notation: Xg,i is the i t h i^{th} i t h unit in the g t h g^{th} g t h group, where each group corresponds to a population with its own parameter μ g \mu_g μ g . Null Hypothesis Examples Comparing body weight of US adult population (group 1) to Canadian adult population (group 2).H < e m > 0 : µ < / e m > 1 = µ 2 H<em>0 : µ</em>1 = µ_2 H < e m > 0 : µ < / e m > 1 = µ 2 Comparing life expectancy of emperor penguins (μ < e m > E \mu<em>E μ < e m > E ) to king penguins (μ < / e m > K \mu</em>K μ < / e m > K ).H < e m > 0 : µ < / e m > E ≥ µ K H<em>0 : µ</em>E \geq µ_K H < e m > 0 : µ < / e m > E ≥ µ K Comparing proportions for each candidate in an election.H < e m > 0 : p < / e m > 1 = p 2 H<em>0 : p</em>1 = p_2 H < e m > 0 : p < / e m > 1 = p 2 Alternative Hypothesis Examples Comparing body weight of US adult population (group 1) to Canadian adult population (group 2) to see if average weights are different.H < e m > A : µ < / e m > 1 ≠ µ 2 H<em>A : µ</em>1 \neq µ_2 H < e m > A : µ < / e m > 1 = µ 2 Comparing life expectancy of emperor penguins (μ < e m > E \mu<em>E μ < e m > E ) to king penguins (μ < / e m > K \mu</em>K μ < / e m > K ) to test if the life expectancy of king penguins is now longer than emperor penguins. Comparing proportions for each candidate in an election to determine if the result of an election can be called.H < e m > A : p < / e m > 1 ≠ p 2 H<em>A : p</em>1 \neq p_2 H < e m > A : p < / e m > 1 = p 2 Overview Using CIs and hypothesis testing for comparing two population means or two population proportions.Examples: tensile strength of two procedures for producing steel, proportion of users that click on an ad for two variations on the graphics Focusing on differences in means first. Notation Mean and variance of population g = 1, 2 are μ < e m > g \mu<em>g μ < e m > g and σ 2 < / e m > g \sigma^2</em>g σ 2 < / e m > g . Samples from each population:X < e m > 11 , … , X < / e m > 1 n 1 X<em>{11}, …, X</em>{1n_1} X < e m > 11 , … , X < / e m > 1 n 1 from population 1X < e m > 21 , … , X < / e m > 2 n 2 X<em>{21}, …, X</em>{2n_2} X < e m > 21 , … , X < / e m > 2 n 2 from population 2 Sample mean and sample variances:X ˉ < e m > g = 1 n < / e m > g ∑ < e m > i = 1 n < / e m > g X g , i \bar{X}<em>g = \frac{1}{n</em>g} \sum<em>{i=1}^{n</em>g} X_{g,i} X ˉ < e m > g = n < / e m > g 1 ∑ < e m > i = 1 n < / e m > g X g , i S 2 < e m > g = 1 n < / e m > g − 1 ∑ < e m > i = 1 n < / e m > g ( X < e m > g , i − X ˉ < / e m > g ) 2 S^2<em>g = \frac{1}{n</em>g - 1} \sum<em>{i=1}^{n</em>g} (X<em>{g,i} - \bar{X}</em>g)^2 S 2 < e m > g = n < / e m > g − 1 1 ∑ < e m > i = 1 n < / e m > g ( X < e m > g , i − X ˉ < / e m > g ) 2 Estimating the Parameter Estimating μ < e m > 1 − μ < / e m > 2 \mu<em>1 - \mu</em>2 μ < e m > 1 − μ < / e m > 2 using X ˉ < e m > 1 − X ˉ < / e m > 2 \bar{X}<em>1 - \bar{X}</em>2 X ˉ < e m > 1 − X ˉ < / e m > 2 . Sampling distribution of X ˉ < e m > 1 − X ˉ < / e m > 2 \bar{X}<em>1 - \bar{X}</em>2 X ˉ < e m > 1 − X ˉ < / e m > 2 :E [ X ˉ < e m > 1 − X ˉ < / e m > 2 ] = E[\bar{X}<em>1 - \bar{X}</em>2] = E [ X ˉ < e m > 1 − X ˉ < / e m > 2 ] = Variance:Assumptions: uncorrelated samples within each population (Var[X ˉ < e m > 1 \bar{X}<em>1 X ˉ < e m > 1 ] = , Var[X ˉ < / e m > 2 \bar{X}</em>2 X ˉ < / e m > 2 ] = ) If n < e m > 1 , n < / e m > 2 n<em>1, n</em>2 n < e m > 1 , n < / e m > 2 are large enough:X ˉ 1 ∼ \bar{X}_1 \sim X ˉ 1 ∼ X ˉ 2 ∼ \bar{X}_2 \sim X ˉ 2 ∼ What about Var[X ˉ < e m > 1 − X ˉ < / e m > 2 \bar{X}<em>1 - \bar{X}</em>2 X ˉ < e m > 1 − X ˉ < / e m > 2 ]? The Sampling Distribution of X ˉ < e m > 1 − X ˉ < / e m > 2 \bar{X}<em>1 - \bar{X}</em>2 X ˉ < e m > 1 − X ˉ < / e m > 2 If the two sample means are uncorrelated, thenV a r [ X ˉ < e m > 1 − X ˉ < / e m > 2 ] = σ 2 < e m > 1 n < / e m > 1 + σ 2 < e m > 2 n < / e m > 2 Var[\bar{X}<em>1 - \bar{X}</em>2] = \frac{\sigma^2<em>1}{n</em>1} + \frac{\sigma^2<em>2}{n</em>2} V a r [ X ˉ < e m > 1 − X ˉ < / e m > 2 ] = n < / e m > 1 σ 2 < e m > 1 + n < / e m > 2 σ 2 < e m > 2 If n < e m > 1 , n < / e m > 2 ≥ 30 n<em>1, n</em>2 \geq 30 n < e m > 1 , n < / e m > 2 ≥ 30 , thenX ˉ < e m > 1 − X ˉ < / e m > 2 ∼ N ( μ < e m > 1 − μ < / e m > 2 , σ 2 < e m > 1 n < / e m > 1 + σ 2 < e m > 2 n < / e m > 2 ) \bar{X}<em>1 - \bar{X}</em>2 \sim N(\mu<em>1 - \mu</em>2, \frac{\sigma^2<em>1}{n</em>1} + \frac{\sigma^2<em>2}{n</em>2}) X ˉ < e m > 1 − X ˉ < / e m > 2 ∼ N ( μ < e m > 1 − μ < / e m > 2 , n < / e m > 1 σ 2 < e m > 1 + n < / e m > 2 σ 2 < e m > 2 ) Variance Assumption X ˉ < e m > 1 − X ˉ < / e m > 2 ∼ N ( μ < e m > 1 − μ < / e m > 2 , σ 2 < e m > 1 n < / e m > 1 + σ 2 < e m > 2 n < / e m > 2 ) \bar{X}<em>1 - \bar{X}</em>2 \sim N(\mu<em>1 - \mu</em>2, \frac{\sigma^2<em>1}{n</em>1} + \frac{\sigma^2<em>2}{n</em>2}) X ˉ < e m > 1 − X ˉ < / e m > 2 ∼ N ( μ < e m > 1 − μ < / e m > 2 , n < / e m > 1 σ 2 < e m > 1 + n < / e m > 2 σ 2 < e m > 2 ) Assumption: the two populations might have different population means but have the same variance (σ 2 < e m > 1 = σ 2 < / e m > 2 = σ 2 \sigma^2<em>1 = \sigma^2</em>2 = \sigma^2 σ 2 < e m > 1 = σ 2 < / e m > 2 = σ 2 ).Then: σ 2 < e m > 1 n < / e m > 1 + σ 2 < e m > 2 n < / e m > 2 = σ 2 ( 1 n < e m > 1 + 1 n < / e m > 2 ) \frac{\sigma^2<em>1}{n</em>1} + \frac{\sigma^2<em>2}{n</em>2} = \sigma^2(\frac{1}{n<em>1} + \frac{1}{n</em>2}) n < / e m > 1 σ 2 < e m > 1 + n < / e m > 2 σ 2 < e m > 2 = σ 2 ( n < e m > 1 1 + n < / e m > 2 1 ) And: X ˉ < e m > 1 − X ˉ < / e m > 2 ∼ N ( μ < e m > 1 − μ < / e m > 2 , σ 2 ( 1 n < e m > 1 + 1 n < / e m > 2 ) ) \bar{X}<em>1 - \bar{X}</em>2 \sim N(\mu<em>1 - \mu</em>2, \sigma^2(\frac{1}{n<em>1} + \frac{1}{n</em>2})) X ˉ < e m > 1 − X ˉ < / e m > 2 ∼ N ( μ < e m > 1 − μ < / e m > 2 , σ 2 ( n < e m > 1 1 + n < / e m > 2 1 )) Estimating the Variance Estimating the shared variance σ 2 \sigma^2 σ 2 by combining the observed sample variances s 2 < e m > 1 s^2<em>1 s 2 < e m > 1 and s 2 < / e m > 2 s^2</em>2 s 2 < / e m > 2 . How to combine them into an estimate of σ 2 \sigma^2 σ 2 ?Could consider averaging them: s 2 = s 2 < e m > 1 + s 2 < / e m > 2 2 s^2 = \frac{s^2<em>1 + s^2</em>2}{2} s 2 = 2 s 2 < e m > 1 + s 2 < / e m > 2 . Potential issue: n < e m > 1 n<em>1 n < e m > 1 may not equal n < / e m > 2 n</em>2 n < / e m > 2 . Pooled Estimate of the Variance Weighted average:s 2 < e m > p = ( n < / e m > 1 − 1 ) s 2 < e m > 1 + ( n < / e m > 2 − 1 ) s 2 < e m > 2 ( n < / e m > 1 + n 2 − 2 ) s^2<em>p = \frac{(n</em>1 - 1)s^2<em>1 + (n</em>2 - 1)s^2<em>2}{(n</em>1 + n_2 - 2)} s 2 < e m > p = ( n < / e m > 1 + n 2 − 2 ) ( n < / e m > 1 − 1 ) s 2 < e m > 1 + ( n < / e m > 2 − 1 ) s 2 < e m > 2 (pooled sample variance) Example:If n < e m > 1 = 14 n<em>1 = 14 n < e m > 1 = 14 and n < / e m > 2 = 14 n</em>2 = 14 n < / e m > 2 = 14 , s 2 < e m > 1 = 10 s^2<em>1 = 10 s 2 < e m > 1 = 10 and s 2 < / e m > 2 = 8 s^2</em>2 = 8 s 2 < / e m > 2 = 8 , then what is s p 2 s^2_p s p 2 ? If n < e m > 1 = 14 n<em>1 = 14 n < e m > 1 = 14 and n < / e m > 2 = 7 n</em>2 = 7 n < / e m > 2 = 7 , s 2 < e m > 1 = 10 s^2<em>1 = 10 s 2 < e m > 1 = 10 and s 2 < / e m > 2 = 8 s^2</em>2 = 8 s 2 < / e m > 2 = 8 , then what is s p 2 s^2_p s p 2 ? R function:pooledVar = function(sampVar1,sampVar2,n1,n2){ ((n1-1)*sampVar1 + (n2-1)*sampVar2)/(n1 + n2 - 2) } WHAT IS THE APPROPRIATE DISTRIBUTION What is the Appropriate Distribution Recall: Form for a standardized random variable? Recall: X ˉ < e m > 1 − X ˉ < / e m > 2 ∼ N ( μ < e m > 1 − μ < / e m > 2 , σ 2 ( 1 n < e m > 1 + 1 n < / e m > 2 ) ) \bar{X}<em>1 - \bar{X}</em>2 \sim N(\mu<em>1 - \mu</em>2, \sigma^2(\frac{1}{n<em>1} + \frac{1}{n</em>2})) X ˉ < e m > 1 − X ˉ < / e m > 2 ∼ N ( μ < e m > 1 − μ < / e m > 2 , σ 2 ( n < e m > 1 1 + n < / e m > 2 1 )) Estimate σ 2 ( 1 n < e m > 1 + 1 n < / e m > 2 ) \sigma^2(\frac{1}{n<em>1} + \frac{1}{n</em>2}) σ 2 ( n < e m > 1 1 + n < / e m > 2 1 ) with s 2 < e m > p ( 1 n < / e m > 1 + 1 n 2 ) s^2<em>p(\frac{1}{n</em>1} + \frac{1}{n_2}) s 2 < e m > p ( n < / e m > 1 1 + n 2 1 ) ( X ˉ < e m > 1 − X ˉ < / e m > 2 ) − ( μ < e m > 1 − μ < / e m > 2 ) s 2 < e m > p ( 1 n < / e m > 1 + 1 n < e m > 2 ) ∼ t ( n < / e m > 1 + n 2 − 2 ) \frac{(\bar{X}<em>1 - \bar{X}</em>2) - (\mu<em>1 - \mu</em>2)}{\sqrt{s^2<em>p(\frac{1}{n</em>1} + \frac{1}{n<em>2})}} \sim t(n</em>1 + n_2 - 2) s 2 < e m > p ( n < / e m > 1 1 + n < e m > 2 1 ) ( X ˉ < e m > 1 − X ˉ < / e m > 2 ) − ( μ < e m > 1 − μ < / e m > 2 ) ∼ t ( n < / e m > 1 + n 2 − 2 ) (Approximately holds if n < e m > 1 , n < / e m > 2 ≥ 30 n<em>1, n</em>2 \geq 30 n < e m > 1 , n < / e m > 2 ≥ 30 ) Punchline: Use a 't' distribution for confidence intervals/hypothesis tests for the difference of two means. Confidence Intervals for μ < e m > 1 − μ < / e m > 2 \mu<em>1 - \mu</em>2 μ < e m > 1 − μ < / e m > 2 If:σ 2 < e m > 1 = σ 2 < / e m > 2 \sigma^2<em>1 = \sigma^2</em>2 σ 2 < e m > 1 = σ 2 < / e m > 2 X ˉ < e m > 1 − X ˉ < / e m > 2 \bar{X}<em>1 - \bar{X}</em>2 X ˉ < e m > 1 − X ˉ < / e m > 2 is normal (primarily: n < e m > 1 , n < / e m > 2 ≥ 30 n<em>1, n</em>2 \geq 30 n < e m > 1 , n < / e m > 2 ≥ 30 ) Then a ( 1 − α ) 100 % (1 - \alpha)100\% ( 1 − α ) 100% CI for μ < e m > 1 − μ < / e m > 2 \mu<em>1 - \mu</em>2 μ < e m > 1 − μ < / e m > 2 is:X ˉ < e m > 1 − X ˉ < / e m > 2 ± t < e m > α / 2 ( n < / e m > 1 + n < e m > 2 − 2 ) s 2 < / e m > p ( 1 n < e m > 1 + 1 n < / e m > 2 ) \bar{X}<em>1 - \bar{X}</em>2 \pm t<em>{\alpha/2}(n</em>1 + n<em>2 - 2)\sqrt{s^2</em>p(\frac{1}{n<em>1} + \frac{1}{n</em>2})} X ˉ < e m > 1 − X ˉ < / e m > 2 ± t < e m > α /2 ( n < / e m > 1 + n < e m > 2 − 2 ) s 2 < / e m > p ( n < e m > 1 1 + n < / e m > 2 1 ) Example Comparing two catalysts in terms of the mean yield of a chemical process.n 1 = 32 n_1 = 32 n 1 = 32 chemical processes with catalyst 1n 2 = 35 n_2 = 35 n 2 = 35 chemical processes with catalyst 2 Experimental results:Catalyst 1: x ˉ < e m > 1 = 45.0313 \bar{x}<em>1 = 45.0313 x ˉ < e m > 1 = 45.0313 and s < / e m > 1 = 3.1976 s</em>1 = 3.1976 s < / e m > 1 = 3.1976 Catalyst 2: x ˉ < e m > 2 = 50.4000 \bar{x}<em>2 = 50.4000 x ˉ < e m > 2 = 50.4000 and s < / e m > 2 = 2.7246 s</em>2 = 2.7246 s < / e m > 2 = 2.7246 Construct a 97% CI for μ < e m > 1 − μ < / e m > 2 \mu<em>1 - \mu</em>2 μ < e m > 1 − μ < / e m > 2 .What assumptions are needed for the validity of the CI? Result: [-6.974882, -3.762618] Another Example With Raw data :x1 = c(48, 43, 46, 40, 41, 46, 50, 41, 50, 42, 40, 44, 44, 49, 45, 49, 46, 48, 44, 44, 48, 48, 44, 44, 41, 49, 48, 40, 43, 42, 45, 49) x2 = c(54, 50, 48, 48, 54, 53, 51, 50, 53, 52, 53, 51, 52, 50, 54, 51, 47, 54, 50, 52, 46, 46, 50, 50, 45, 47, 47, 52, 50, 51, 50, 52, 51, 55, 45) R code:t.test(x1,x2, var.equal=TRUE, conf.level = .97)97 percent confidence interval: -6.974882 -3.762618 Hypothesis tests for μ < e m > 1 − μ < / e m > 2 \mu<em>1 - \mu</em>2 μ < e m > 1 − μ < / e m > 2 Follows the same overall structure as other tests. Specify reference value Δ < e m > 0 \Delta<em>0 Δ < e m > 0 and α \alpha α (often Δ < / e m > 0 = 0 \Delta</em>0 = 0 Δ < / e m > 0 = 0 ). Tests:H < e m > 0 : µ < / e m > 1 − µ < e m > 2 = Δ < / e m > 0 H<em>0 : µ</em>1 - µ<em>2 = \Delta</em>0 H < e m > 0 : µ < / e m > 1 − µ < e m > 2 = Δ < / e m > 0 vs H < e m > A : µ < / e m > 1 − µ < e m > 2 ≠ Δ < / e m > 0 H<em>A : µ</em>1 - µ<em>2 \neq \Delta</em>0 H < e m > A : µ < / e m > 1 − µ < e m > 2 = Δ < / e m > 0 H < e m > 0 : µ < / e m > 1 − µ < e m > 2 ≥ Δ < / e m > 0 H<em>0 : µ</em>1 - µ<em>2 \geq \Delta</em>0 H < e m > 0 : µ < / e m > 1 − µ < e m > 2 ≥ Δ < / e m > 0 vs H < e m > A : µ < / e m > 1 − µ < e m > 2 < Δ < / e m > 0 H<em>A : µ</em>1 - µ<em>2 < \Delta</em>0 H < e m > A : µ < / e m > 1 − µ < e m > 2 < Δ < / e m > 0 H < e m > 0 : µ < / e m > 1 − µ < e m > 2 ≤ Δ < / e m > 0 H<em>0 : µ</em>1 - µ<em>2 \leq \Delta</em>0 H < e m > 0 : µ < / e m > 1 − µ < e m > 2 ≤ Δ < / e m > 0 vs H < e m > A : µ < / e m > 1 − µ < e m > 2 > Δ < / e m > 0 H<em>A : µ</em>1 - µ<em>2 > \Delta</em>0 H < e m > A : µ < / e m > 1 − µ < e m > 2 > Δ < / e m > 0 Observed test statistic:T < e m > o b s = x ˉ < / e m > 1 − x ˉ < e m > 2 − Δ < / e m > 0 s 2 < e m > p ( 1 n < / e m > 1 + 1 n 2 ) T<em>{obs} = \frac{\bar{x}</em>1 - \bar{x}<em>2 - \Delta</em>0}{\sqrt{s^2<em>p(\frac{1}{n</em>1} + \frac{1}{n_2})}} T < e m > o b s = s 2 < e m > p ( n < / e m > 1 1 + n 2 1 ) x ˉ < / e m > 1 − x ˉ < e m > 2 − Δ < / e m > 0 Compared to the t ( n < e m > 1 + n < / e m > 2 − 2 ) t(n<em>1 + n</em>2 - 2) t ( n < e m > 1 + n < / e m > 2 − 2 ) distribution. Catalyst Example using a significance level α = 0.03 \alpha = 0.03 α = 0.03 :T o b s = − 7.4166 T_{obs} = -7.4166 T o b s = − 7.4166 , p-value = 3.173 e − 10 3.173e-10 3.173 e − 10 An Experiment Do students that sit in front have a different average height than the back? Confidence Interval Hypothesis Test Key assumption behind pooling σ 2 < e m > 1 = σ 2 < / e m > 2 = σ 2 ⟹ σ 2 < e m > 1 n < / e m > 1 + σ 2 < e m > 2 n < / e m > 2 = σ 2 ( 1 n < e m > 1 + 1 n < / e m > 2 ) \sigma^2<em>1 = \sigma^2</em>2 = \sigma^2 \implies \frac{\sigma^2<em>1}{n</em>1} + \frac{\sigma^2<em>2}{n</em>2} = \sigma^2(\frac{1}{n<em>1} + \frac{1}{n</em>2}) σ 2 < e m > 1 = σ 2 < / e m > 2 = σ 2 ⟹ n < / e m > 1 σ 2 < e m > 1 + n < / e m > 2 σ 2 < e m > 2 = σ 2 ( n < e m > 1 1 + n < / e m > 2 1 ) Estimate σ 2 \sigma^2 σ 2 with the pooled sample variance:s 2 < e m > p = ( n < / e m > 1 − 1 ) s 2 < e m > 1 + ( n < / e m > 2 − 1 ) s 2 < e m > 2 ( n < / e m > 1 + n 2 − 2 ) s^2<em>p = \frac{(n</em>1 - 1)s^2<em>1 + (n</em>2 - 1)s^2<em>2}{(n</em>1 + n_2 - 2)} s 2 < e m > p = ( n < / e m > 1 + n 2 − 2 ) ( n < / e m > 1 − 1 ) s 2 < e m > 1 + ( n < / e m > 2 − 1 ) s 2 < e m > 2 What happens if we don’t make this assumption? Unequal variances Since V a r [ X ˉ < e m > 1 − X ˉ < / e m > 2 ] = σ 2 < e m > 1 n < / e m > 1 + σ 2 < e m > 2 n < / e m > 2 Var[\bar{X}<em>1 - \bar{X}</em>2] = \frac{\sigma^2<em>1}{n</em>1} + \frac{\sigma^2<em>2}{n</em>2} V a r [ X ˉ < e m > 1 − X ˉ < / e m > 2 ] = n < / e m > 1 σ 2 < e m > 1 + n < / e m > 2 σ 2 < e m > 2 , estimate it by plugging in the sample variances directly:s 2 < e m > 1 n < / e m > 1 + s 2 < e m > 2 n < / e m > 2 \frac{s^2<em>1}{n</em>1} + \frac{s^2<em>2}{n</em>2} n < / e m > 1 s 2 < e m > 1 + n < / e m > 2 s 2 < e m > 2 Observed test statistic:T < e m > o b s = x ˉ < / e m > 1 − x ˉ < e m > 2 − Δ < / e m > 0 s 2 < e m > 1 n < / e m > 1 + s 2 < e m > 2 n < / e m > 2 T<em>{obs} = \frac{\bar{x}</em>1 - \bar{x}<em>2 - \Delta</em>0}{\sqrt{\frac{s^2<em>1}{n</em>1} + \frac{s^2<em>2}{n</em>2}}} T < e m > o b s = n < / e m > 1 s 2 < e m > 1 + n < / e m > 2 s 2 < e m > 2 x ˉ < / e m > 1 − x ˉ < e m > 2 − Δ < / e m > 0 Welch’s test: Unequal variances Equal variances: the correct distribution is t ( n < e m > 1 + n < / e m > 2 − 2 ) t(n<em>1 + n</em>2 - 2) t ( n < e m > 1 + n < / e m > 2 − 2 ) Unequal variances: the correct distribution is still a t, but the degrees of freedom is harder to calculate:d f = ( s 2 < e m > 1 n < / e m > 1 + s 2 < e m > 2 n < / e m > 2 ) 2 ( s 2 < e m > 1 n < / e m > 1 ) 2 n < e m > 1 − 1 + ( s 2 < / e m > 2 n < e m > 2 ) 2 n < / e m > 2 − 1 df = \frac{(\frac{s^2<em>1}{n</em>1} + \frac{s^2<em>2}{n</em>2})^2}{\frac{(\frac{s^2<em>1}{n</em>1})^2}{n<em>1 - 1} + \frac{(\frac{s^2</em>2}{n<em>2})^2}{n</em>2 - 1}} df = n < e m > 1 − 1 ( n < / e m > 1 s 2 < e m > 1 ) 2 + n < / e m > 2 − 1 ( n < e m > 2 s 2 < / e m > 2 ) 2 ( n < / e m > 1 s 2 < e m > 1 + n < / e m > 2 s 2 < e m > 2 ) 2 R syntax:t.test(x1,x2, var.equal=TRUE) (Equal variances)t.test(x1,x2) (Unequal variances) Punchline: Just omit the ‘var.equal = TRUE’ argument