1. Table 1: Linear Fit ( )

Fit Results

  • ( = 0.984), Adjusted ( = 0.983)
  • RMSE = 0.593
  • F-statistic = 569, p-value = ()

Fitted equation:

ANOVA Table:

SourceSSdfMSFp-value
RegressionMATLAB1–569
Residual–9–
Total–10

Parameter SE and t-tests:

ParamEstimateSEtp-value
β₀3.06620.334579.1645
β₁1.34950.05655323.863

Matrix results:


2. Table 2: Fits

(a) Linear Fit ()

  • ( = 0.923), Adjusted ( = 0.915)
  • RMSE = 8.03
  • F-statistic = 108, p-value = ()

Fitted equation:

Parameter SE and t-tests:

ParamEstimateSEtp-value
β₀-13.9564.5277-3.08240.013089
β₁7.96460.7653310.407()

(b) Quadratic Fit ()

  • Transform (Z = )
  • , Adjusted ( = 1.000)
  • RMSE = 0.533
  • F-statistic = (), p-value = ()

Fitted equation:

Parameter SE and t-tests:

ParamEstimateSEtp-value
β₀-2.07050.23471-8.8218()
β₁0.79820.0048908163.21()

(c) Model Comparison

  • Linear model: High () but residuals show curvature → poor fit at large
  • Quadratic model: (), residuals random, very small RMSE.
  • Conclusion: Quadratic model is the better fit. Residual analysis confirms.