Table 6.
Contingency tables testing the correlation between binarity frequency and dusty or Li-rich nature.
| Method (a) on S1 | |||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| const. | jitter | SB? | SB | Total | const. | jitter | SB? | SB | Total | Significance of H0 | |||||||
| counts n | Observed p (%) | (internal) | |||||||||||||||
| Dust | 0 | 3 | 1 | 4 | 8 | 0.0 | 37.5 | 12.5 | 50.0 | 100% | |||||||
| No-dust | 9 | 1 | 2 | 4 | 16 | 56.3 | 6.2 | 12.5 | 25.0 | 100% | 1.6% | ||||||
| Li-rich | 5 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 11 | 45.4 | 18.2 | 18.2 | 18.2 | 100% | |||||||
| No-Li | 4 | 2 | 1 | 6 | 13 | 30.8 | 15.4 | 7.7 | 46.2 | 100% | 54.3% | ||||||
| Total Ny (S1) | 9 | 4 | 3 | 8 | 24 | 37.5 | 16.7 | 12.5 | 33.3 | Expected p (%) | |||||||
| Method (b) on S1′ | |||||||||||||||||
| const. | SB? | SB | Total | const. | SB? | SB | Total | Significance of H0 | |||||||||
| counts n | Observed p (%) | (external w.r.t. R) | |||||||||||||||
| Total Ny (S1′) | 14 | 2 | 8 | 24 | 58.3 | 8.3 | 33.4 | 100% | 13.0% | ||||||||
| Dust | 3 | 1 | 4 | 8 | 37.5 | 12.5 | 50.0 | 100% | 3.3% | ||||||||
| No-dust | 11 | 1 | 4 | 16 | 68.75 | 6.25 | 25.0 | 100% | 63.6% | ||||||||
| Li-rich | 8 | 1 | 2 | 11 | 72.7 | 9.1 | 18.2 | 100% | 73.3% | ||||||||
| No-Li | 6 | 1 | 6 | 13 | 46.2 | 7.6 | 46.2 | 100% | 2.4% | ||||||||
| Total Ny (R) | 145 | 12 | 33 | 190 | 76.3 | 6.3 | 17.4 | Expected p (%) | |||||||||
Notes. See text (Sect. 5.5) for the meaning of the symbols. Methods (a) and (b) differ by the way the binary frequencies are compared: method (a) makes an internal comparison (i.e. dust vs. no-dust, Li-rich vs. no-Li, and therefore the significance given in the last column refers to such an internal comparison), whereas method (b) compares them with that in the reference sample R. Therefore, for method (b), the significance in the last column refers to the contingency tables constructed from the considered row and the last row referring to sample R. Method (a) applies to sample S1 whereas method (b) applies to sample S1′.
Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.
Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.
Initial download of the metrics may take a while.