How many significant figures for an arithmetic mean?












0












$begingroup$


I am doing an analysis of a group of health centers scattered through a city. I'm trying to find, for a group of zip codes, how many of the health centers are within 5 miles of each zip code; then, I want to take an average. I'd like to say, for example, "On average, there are N centers within 5 miles of a given zip code in group A, and K within 5 miles of those in group B."



My question is, if (for example) in a group of 5 zip codes I come up with 3, 2, 0, 1, and 1 "nearby" centers, should I say that there are on average 1.4 centers near a given zip code, or should I say that there is 1?










share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$

















    0












    $begingroup$


    I am doing an analysis of a group of health centers scattered through a city. I'm trying to find, for a group of zip codes, how many of the health centers are within 5 miles of each zip code; then, I want to take an average. I'd like to say, for example, "On average, there are N centers within 5 miles of a given zip code in group A, and K within 5 miles of those in group B."



    My question is, if (for example) in a group of 5 zip codes I come up with 3, 2, 0, 1, and 1 "nearby" centers, should I say that there are on average 1.4 centers near a given zip code, or should I say that there is 1?










    share|cite|improve this question









    $endgroup$















      0












      0








      0





      $begingroup$


      I am doing an analysis of a group of health centers scattered through a city. I'm trying to find, for a group of zip codes, how many of the health centers are within 5 miles of each zip code; then, I want to take an average. I'd like to say, for example, "On average, there are N centers within 5 miles of a given zip code in group A, and K within 5 miles of those in group B."



      My question is, if (for example) in a group of 5 zip codes I come up with 3, 2, 0, 1, and 1 "nearby" centers, should I say that there are on average 1.4 centers near a given zip code, or should I say that there is 1?










      share|cite|improve this question









      $endgroup$




      I am doing an analysis of a group of health centers scattered through a city. I'm trying to find, for a group of zip codes, how many of the health centers are within 5 miles of each zip code; then, I want to take an average. I'd like to say, for example, "On average, there are N centers within 5 miles of a given zip code in group A, and K within 5 miles of those in group B."



      My question is, if (for example) in a group of 5 zip codes I come up with 3, 2, 0, 1, and 1 "nearby" centers, should I say that there are on average 1.4 centers near a given zip code, or should I say that there is 1?







      arithmetic significant-figures






      share|cite|improve this question













      share|cite|improve this question











      share|cite|improve this question




      share|cite|improve this question










      asked Dec 24 '18 at 3:44









      Matt GuttingMatt Gutting

      209112




      209112






















          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          2












          $begingroup$

          Owing to the rules of significant figures, since the fraction you'd get is $7/5$, with the $5$ as a given constant, you'd go to a precision of one place.



          Thus, it'd be $1$ instead of $1.4$.



          Though personally, this doesn't seem like the kind of problem that you'd use significant figures for, since significant figures are primarily meant to contend with inaccuracies and human errors in measurement. But I'll assume you know more about the context of this problem than I do.






          share|cite|improve this answer









          $endgroup$













          • $begingroup$
            The reason I was asking actually has a bit less to do with significant figures than with the application - it seemed odd to me to say that "on average there are 1.4 centers near the zip code". Perhaps I should think of it as "the average number of centers near the zip code is 1.4"?
            $endgroup$
            – Matt Gutting
            Dec 24 '18 at 4:04






          • 2




            $begingroup$
            Personally both are equivalent, so I guess whichever phrasing makes sense to you. I just have kinda learned through experience that averages don't mean it's necessarily exact, i.e. you wouldn't see $1.4$ centers anywhere because what in the world is $0.4$ of a center? You'd just see mostly $1$ or $2$, maybe sometimes $0$ or $3$ rarely, depending on the distribution - that's basically what the statement "$1.4$ centers on average" means. So I think you're just kinda overthinking it and it seems perfectly natural to say there's an average of $1.4$ centers.
            $endgroup$
            – Eevee Trainer
            Dec 24 '18 at 4:07














          Your Answer








          StackExchange.ready(function() {
          var channelOptions = {
          tags: "".split(" "),
          id: "69"
          };
          initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

          StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
          // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
          if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
          StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
          createEditor();
          });
          }
          else {
          createEditor();
          }
          });

          function createEditor() {
          StackExchange.prepareEditor({
          heartbeatType: 'answer',
          autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
          convertImagesToLinks: true,
          noModals: true,
          showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
          reputationToPostImages: 10,
          bindNavPrevention: true,
          postfix: "",
          imageUploader: {
          brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
          contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
          allowUrls: true
          },
          noCode: true, onDemand: true,
          discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
          ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
          });


          }
          });














          draft saved

          draft discarded


















          StackExchange.ready(
          function () {
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3050914%2fhow-many-significant-figures-for-an-arithmetic-mean%23new-answer', 'question_page');
          }
          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown

























          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes








          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes









          active

          oldest

          votes






          active

          oldest

          votes









          2












          $begingroup$

          Owing to the rules of significant figures, since the fraction you'd get is $7/5$, with the $5$ as a given constant, you'd go to a precision of one place.



          Thus, it'd be $1$ instead of $1.4$.



          Though personally, this doesn't seem like the kind of problem that you'd use significant figures for, since significant figures are primarily meant to contend with inaccuracies and human errors in measurement. But I'll assume you know more about the context of this problem than I do.






          share|cite|improve this answer









          $endgroup$













          • $begingroup$
            The reason I was asking actually has a bit less to do with significant figures than with the application - it seemed odd to me to say that "on average there are 1.4 centers near the zip code". Perhaps I should think of it as "the average number of centers near the zip code is 1.4"?
            $endgroup$
            – Matt Gutting
            Dec 24 '18 at 4:04






          • 2




            $begingroup$
            Personally both are equivalent, so I guess whichever phrasing makes sense to you. I just have kinda learned through experience that averages don't mean it's necessarily exact, i.e. you wouldn't see $1.4$ centers anywhere because what in the world is $0.4$ of a center? You'd just see mostly $1$ or $2$, maybe sometimes $0$ or $3$ rarely, depending on the distribution - that's basically what the statement "$1.4$ centers on average" means. So I think you're just kinda overthinking it and it seems perfectly natural to say there's an average of $1.4$ centers.
            $endgroup$
            – Eevee Trainer
            Dec 24 '18 at 4:07


















          2












          $begingroup$

          Owing to the rules of significant figures, since the fraction you'd get is $7/5$, with the $5$ as a given constant, you'd go to a precision of one place.



          Thus, it'd be $1$ instead of $1.4$.



          Though personally, this doesn't seem like the kind of problem that you'd use significant figures for, since significant figures are primarily meant to contend with inaccuracies and human errors in measurement. But I'll assume you know more about the context of this problem than I do.






          share|cite|improve this answer









          $endgroup$













          • $begingroup$
            The reason I was asking actually has a bit less to do with significant figures than with the application - it seemed odd to me to say that "on average there are 1.4 centers near the zip code". Perhaps I should think of it as "the average number of centers near the zip code is 1.4"?
            $endgroup$
            – Matt Gutting
            Dec 24 '18 at 4:04






          • 2




            $begingroup$
            Personally both are equivalent, so I guess whichever phrasing makes sense to you. I just have kinda learned through experience that averages don't mean it's necessarily exact, i.e. you wouldn't see $1.4$ centers anywhere because what in the world is $0.4$ of a center? You'd just see mostly $1$ or $2$, maybe sometimes $0$ or $3$ rarely, depending on the distribution - that's basically what the statement "$1.4$ centers on average" means. So I think you're just kinda overthinking it and it seems perfectly natural to say there's an average of $1.4$ centers.
            $endgroup$
            – Eevee Trainer
            Dec 24 '18 at 4:07
















          2












          2








          2





          $begingroup$

          Owing to the rules of significant figures, since the fraction you'd get is $7/5$, with the $5$ as a given constant, you'd go to a precision of one place.



          Thus, it'd be $1$ instead of $1.4$.



          Though personally, this doesn't seem like the kind of problem that you'd use significant figures for, since significant figures are primarily meant to contend with inaccuracies and human errors in measurement. But I'll assume you know more about the context of this problem than I do.






          share|cite|improve this answer









          $endgroup$



          Owing to the rules of significant figures, since the fraction you'd get is $7/5$, with the $5$ as a given constant, you'd go to a precision of one place.



          Thus, it'd be $1$ instead of $1.4$.



          Though personally, this doesn't seem like the kind of problem that you'd use significant figures for, since significant figures are primarily meant to contend with inaccuracies and human errors in measurement. But I'll assume you know more about the context of this problem than I do.







          share|cite|improve this answer












          share|cite|improve this answer



          share|cite|improve this answer










          answered Dec 24 '18 at 3:53









          Eevee TrainerEevee Trainer

          10.7k31843




          10.7k31843












          • $begingroup$
            The reason I was asking actually has a bit less to do with significant figures than with the application - it seemed odd to me to say that "on average there are 1.4 centers near the zip code". Perhaps I should think of it as "the average number of centers near the zip code is 1.4"?
            $endgroup$
            – Matt Gutting
            Dec 24 '18 at 4:04






          • 2




            $begingroup$
            Personally both are equivalent, so I guess whichever phrasing makes sense to you. I just have kinda learned through experience that averages don't mean it's necessarily exact, i.e. you wouldn't see $1.4$ centers anywhere because what in the world is $0.4$ of a center? You'd just see mostly $1$ or $2$, maybe sometimes $0$ or $3$ rarely, depending on the distribution - that's basically what the statement "$1.4$ centers on average" means. So I think you're just kinda overthinking it and it seems perfectly natural to say there's an average of $1.4$ centers.
            $endgroup$
            – Eevee Trainer
            Dec 24 '18 at 4:07




















          • $begingroup$
            The reason I was asking actually has a bit less to do with significant figures than with the application - it seemed odd to me to say that "on average there are 1.4 centers near the zip code". Perhaps I should think of it as "the average number of centers near the zip code is 1.4"?
            $endgroup$
            – Matt Gutting
            Dec 24 '18 at 4:04






          • 2




            $begingroup$
            Personally both are equivalent, so I guess whichever phrasing makes sense to you. I just have kinda learned through experience that averages don't mean it's necessarily exact, i.e. you wouldn't see $1.4$ centers anywhere because what in the world is $0.4$ of a center? You'd just see mostly $1$ or $2$, maybe sometimes $0$ or $3$ rarely, depending on the distribution - that's basically what the statement "$1.4$ centers on average" means. So I think you're just kinda overthinking it and it seems perfectly natural to say there's an average of $1.4$ centers.
            $endgroup$
            – Eevee Trainer
            Dec 24 '18 at 4:07


















          $begingroup$
          The reason I was asking actually has a bit less to do with significant figures than with the application - it seemed odd to me to say that "on average there are 1.4 centers near the zip code". Perhaps I should think of it as "the average number of centers near the zip code is 1.4"?
          $endgroup$
          – Matt Gutting
          Dec 24 '18 at 4:04




          $begingroup$
          The reason I was asking actually has a bit less to do with significant figures than with the application - it seemed odd to me to say that "on average there are 1.4 centers near the zip code". Perhaps I should think of it as "the average number of centers near the zip code is 1.4"?
          $endgroup$
          – Matt Gutting
          Dec 24 '18 at 4:04




          2




          2




          $begingroup$
          Personally both are equivalent, so I guess whichever phrasing makes sense to you. I just have kinda learned through experience that averages don't mean it's necessarily exact, i.e. you wouldn't see $1.4$ centers anywhere because what in the world is $0.4$ of a center? You'd just see mostly $1$ or $2$, maybe sometimes $0$ or $3$ rarely, depending on the distribution - that's basically what the statement "$1.4$ centers on average" means. So I think you're just kinda overthinking it and it seems perfectly natural to say there's an average of $1.4$ centers.
          $endgroup$
          – Eevee Trainer
          Dec 24 '18 at 4:07






          $begingroup$
          Personally both are equivalent, so I guess whichever phrasing makes sense to you. I just have kinda learned through experience that averages don't mean it's necessarily exact, i.e. you wouldn't see $1.4$ centers anywhere because what in the world is $0.4$ of a center? You'd just see mostly $1$ or $2$, maybe sometimes $0$ or $3$ rarely, depending on the distribution - that's basically what the statement "$1.4$ centers on average" means. So I think you're just kinda overthinking it and it seems perfectly natural to say there's an average of $1.4$ centers.
          $endgroup$
          – Eevee Trainer
          Dec 24 '18 at 4:07




















          draft saved

          draft discarded




















































          Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


          • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

          But avoid



          • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

          • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


          Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


          To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




          draft saved


          draft discarded














          StackExchange.ready(
          function () {
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3050914%2fhow-many-significant-figures-for-an-arithmetic-mean%23new-answer', 'question_page');
          }
          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown





















































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown

































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown







          Popular posts from this blog

          Plaza Victoria

          Puebla de Zaragoza

          Musa