1          ****************************************************;
2          *** Example of Analysis of Covariance            ***;
3          ***   Steel and Torrie (1980) example (pg. 424)  ***;
4          ***     Analysis of three diet treatments on two ***;
5          ***     sexes, where X is the initial weight,   ***;
6          ***     and Y is the weight gain in pounds.     ***;
7          ****************************************************;
8          OPTIONS NOCENTER PS=256 LS=132 nodate nonumber;
9          DATA HOGS; INFILE CARDS MISSOVER;
10            Title1 'Analysis of Covariance example from Steel & Torrie, 1980';
11            INPUT PEN SEX $ RATION $ X Y;
12         CARDS;
NOTE: The data set WORK.HOGS has 30 observations and 5 variables.
NOTE: DATA statement used:
      real time           0.05 seconds
      cpu time            0.05 seconds
12       !        RUN;
43         ;
44         PROC PRINT DATA=HOGS; Title2 'Raw data listing'; RUN;
NOTE: There were 30 observations read from the data set WORK.HOGS.
NOTE: The PROCEDURE PRINT printed page 1.
NOTE: PROCEDURE PRINT used:
      real time           0.04 seconds
      cpu time            0.04 seconds
 
 
Analysis of Covariance example from Steel & Torrie, 1980
Raw data listing
 

Obs    PEN    SEX    RATION     X      Y
 
  1     1      M       a1      38     9.52
  2     1      F       a1      48     9.94
  3     1      M       a2      39     8.51
  4     1      F       a2      48    10.00
  5     1      M       a3      48     9.11
  6     1      F       a3      48     9.75
  7     2      M       a1      35     8.21
  8     2      F       a1      32     9.48
  9     2      M       a2      38     9.95
 10     2      F       a2      32     9.24
 11     2      M       a3      37     8.50
 12     2      F       a3      28     8.66
 13     3      M       a1      41     9.32
 14     3      F       a1      35     9.32
 15     3      M       a2      46     8.43
 16     3      F       a2      41     9.34
 17     3      M       a3      42     8.90
 18     3      F       a3      33     7.63
 19     4      M       a1      48    10.56
 20     4      F       a1      46    10.90
 21     4      M       a2      40     8.86
 22     4      F       a2      46     9.68
 23     4      M       a3      42     9.51
 24     4      F       a3      50    10.37
 25     5      M       a1      43    10.42
 26     5      F       a1      32     8.82
 27     5      M       a2      40     9.20
 28     5      F       a2      37     9.67
 29     5      M       a3      40     8.76
 30     5      F       a3      30     8.57


 
46         PROC MIXED DATA=HOGS; CLASSES RATION SEX PEN;
47               TITLE2 'Analysis of Covariance Example';
48               TITLE3 'Design done in PROC MIXED without a covariable';
49            MODEL Y = RATION|SEX / htype=1 3 DDFM=Satterthwaite;
50               random PEN;
51               LSMEANS RATION|SEX / ADJUST=TUKEY PDIFF;
52          ods output diffs=ppp;
53          ods output lsmeans=mmm;
54          ods listing exclude diffs;
55          ods listing exclude lsmeans;
56         run;
NOTE: Convergence criteria met.
NOTE: The data set WORK.MMM has 11 observations and 8 variables.
NOTE: The data set WORK.PPP has 19 observations and 12 variables.
NOTE: The PROCEDURE MIXED printed page 2.
NOTE: PROCEDURE MIXED used:
      real time           0.22 seconds
      cpu time            0.22 seconds
57         %include 'C:\Program Files\SAS Institute\SAS\V8\stat\sample\pdmix800.sas';
673        %pdmix800(ppp,mmm,alpha=.05,sort=yes);
 
Analysis of Covariance example from Steel & Torrie, 1980
Analysis of Covariance Example
Design done in PROC MIXED without a covariable
 
The Mixed Procedure
                  Model Information
Data Set                     WORK.HOGS
Dependent Variable           Y
Covariance Structure         Variance Components
Estimation Method            REML
Residual Variance Method     Profile
Fixed Effects SE Method      Model-Based
Degrees of Freedom Method    Satterthwaite
 
             Class Level Information
Class     Levels    Values
RATION         3    a1 a2 a3
SEX            2    F M
PEN            5    1 2 3 4 5
 
            Dimensions
Covariance Parameters             2
Columns in X                     12
Columns in Z                      5
Subjects                          1
Max Obs Per Subject              30
Observations Used                30
Observations Not Used             0
Total Observations               30
 
                     Iteration History
Iteration    Evaluations    -2 Res Log Like       Criterion
        0              1        63.35598278
        1              1        60.98295712      0.00000000
                   Convergence criteria met.
 
Covariance Parameter Estimates
Cov Parm     Estimate
PEN            0.1329
Residual       0.4157
 
           Fit Statistics
-2 Res Log Likelihood            61.0
AIC (smaller is better)          65.0
AICC (smaller is better)         65.6
BIC (smaller is better)          64.2
 
         Type 1 Tests of Fixed Effects
               Num     Den
Effect          DF      DF    F Value    Pr > F
RATION           2      20       2.73    0.0896
SEX              1      20       1.04    0.3189
RATION*SEX       2      20       0.57    0.5730
 
         Type 3 Tests of Fixed Effects
               Num     Den
Effect          DF      DF    F Value    Pr > F
RATION           2      20       2.73    0.0896
SEX              1      20       1.04    0.3189
RATION*SEX       2      20       0.57    0.5730


Analysis of Covariance example from Steel & Torrie, 1980
Analysis of Covariance Example
Design done in PROC MIXED without a covariable
 
Effect=RATION   Method=Tukey-Kramer(P<.05)   Comparison Group=1
 
                                    Standard    Letter     MinSig     MaxSig     AvgSig
Obs    RATION    SEX    Estimate     Error      Group        Diff       Diff       Diff
  1      a1               9.6490      0.2610      A       0.72951    0.72951    0.72951
  2      a2               9.2880      0.2610      A       0.72951    0.72951    0.72951
  3      a3               8.9760      0.2610      A       0.72951    0.72951    0.72951
 
 
Effect=SEX   Method=Tukey-Kramer(P<.05)   Comparison Group=2
 
                                    Standard    Letter     MinSig     MaxSig     AvgSig
Obs    RATION    SEX    Estimate     Error      Group        Diff       Diff       Diff
  4               F       9.4247      0.2330      A       0.49111    0.49111    0.49111
  5               M       9.1840      0.2330      A       0.49111    0.49111    0.49111
 
 
Effect=RATION*SEX   Method=Tukey-Kramer(P<.05)   Comparison Group=3
 
                                    Standard    Letter     MinSig     MaxSig     AvgSig
Obs    RATION    SEX    Estimate     Error      Group        Diff       Diff       Diff
  6      a1       F       9.6920      0.3312      A       1.28177    1.28177    1.28177
  7      a1       M       9.6060      0.3312      A       1.28177    1.28177    1.28177
  8      a2       F       9.5860      0.3312      A       1.28177    1.28177    1.28177
  9      a3       F       8.9960      0.3312      A       1.28177    1.28177    1.28177
 10      a2       M       8.9900      0.3312      A       1.28177    1.28177    1.28177
 11      a3       M       8.9560      0.3312      A       1.28177    1.28177    1.28177
 
 
 
 
 
677        PROC MIXED DATA=HOGS; CLASSES RATION SEX PEN;
678              TITLE3 'Design done in PROC MIXED with a covariable';
679           MODEL Y = RATION|SEX X / htype=1 3 DDFM=Satterthwaite outp=ResidData;
680              random PEN;
681              LSMEANS RATION|SEX / ADJUST=TUKEY CL PDIFF;
682         ods output diffs=ppp;
683         ods output lsmeans=mmm;
684         ods listing exclude diffs;
685         ods listing exclude lsmeans;
686        run;
NOTE: Convergence criteria met.
NOTE: The data set WORK.MMM has 11 observations and 11 variables.
NOTE: The data set WORK.PPP has 19 observations and 17 variables.
NOTE: The data set WORK.RESIDDATA has 30 observations and 12 variables.
NOTE: The PROCEDURE MIXED printed page 4.
NOTE: PROCEDURE MIXED used:
      real time           0.27 seconds
      cpu time            0.27 seconds
687        %include 'C:\Program Files\SAS Institute\SAS\V8\stat\sample\pdmix800.sas';
1303       %pdmix800(ppp,mmm,alpha=.05,sort=yes);
 
 
 


Analysis of Covariance example from Steel & Torrie, 1980
Design done in PROC MIXED with a covariable
The Mixed Procedure
 
                  Model Information
Data Set                     WORK.HOGS
Dependent Variable           Y
Covariance Structure         Variance Components
Estimation Method            REML
Residual Variance Method     Profile
Fixed Effects SE Method      Model-Based
Degrees of Freedom Method    Satterthwaite
 
             Class Level Information
Class     Levels    Values
RATION         3    a1 a2 a3
SEX            2    F M
PEN            5    1 2 3 4 5
 
Dimensions
Covariance Parameters             2
Columns in X                     13
Columns in Z                      5
Subjects                          1
Max Obs Per Subject              30
Observations Used                30
Observations Not Used             0
Total Observations               30
 
                     Iteration History
Iteration    Evaluations    -2 Res Log Like       Criterion
        0              1        55.08910489
        1              3        53.38841782      0.00015698
        2              1        53.38752175      0.00000027
        3              1        53.38752024      0.00000000
                   Convergence criteria met.
 
Covariance Parameter Estimates
Cov Parm     Estimate
PEN           0.06595
Residual       0.2504
 
           Fit Statistics
-2 Res Log Likelihood            53.4
AIC (smaller is better)          57.4
AICC (smaller is better)         58.0
BIC (smaller is better)          56.6
 
         Type 1 Tests of Fixed Effects
               Num     Den
Effect          DF      DF    F Value    Pr > F
RATION           2    19.4       4.53    0.0243
SEX              1    19.4       1.74    0.2031
RATION*SEX       2    19.4       0.95    0.4037
X                1    18.3      17.72    0.0005
 
         Type 3 Tests of Fixed Effects
               Num     Den
Effect          DF      DF    F Value    Pr > F
RATION           2    19.5       4.65    0.0224
SEX              1      20       4.76    0.0413
RATION*SEX       2    19.6       0.23    0.7935
X                1    18.3      17.72    0.0005


Analysis of Covariance example from Steel & Torrie, 1980
Analysis of Covariance Example
Design done in PROC MIXED with a covariable
 
Effect=RATION   Method=Tukey-Kramer(P<.05)   Comparison Group=1
 
                                    Standard    Letter     MinSig     MaxSig     AvgSig
Obs    RATION    SEX    Estimate     Error      Group        Diff       Diff       Diff
  1      a1               9.6733      0.1956      A       0.56727    0.56896     0.5684
  2      a2               9.2395      0.1959      AB      0.56727    0.56896     0.5684
  3      a3               9.0003      0.1956      B       0.56727    0.56896     0.5684
 
Effect=SEX   Method=Tukey-Kramer(P<.05)   Comparison Group=2
 
                                    Standard    Letter     MinSig     MaxSig     AvgSig
Obs    RATION    SEX    Estimate     Error      Group        Diff       Diff       Diff
  4               F       9.5083      0.1740      A       0.39002    0.39002    0.39002
  5               M       9.1004      0.1740      B       0.39002    0.39002    0.39002
 
Effect=RATION*SEX   Method=Tukey-Kramer(P<.05)   Comparison Group=3
 
                                    Standard    Letter     MinSig     MaxSig     AvgSig
Obs    RATION    SEX    Estimate     Error      Group        Diff       Diff       Diff
  6      a1       F       9.8134      0.2532      A       0.99411    1.02295    1.00275
  7      a1       M       9.5332      0.2521      A       0.99411    1.02295    1.00275
  8      a2       F       9.5294      0.2519      A       0.99411    1.02295    1.00275
  9      a3       F       9.1821      0.2554      A       0.99411    1.02295    1.00275
 10      a2       M       8.9495      0.2517      A       0.99411    1.02295    1.00275
 11      a3       M       8.8185      0.2536      A       0.99411    1.02295    1.00275
 
 
 
1307       PROC MIXED DATA=HOGS; CLASSES RATION SEX PEN;
1308             TITLE3 'Design with Covariable and interaction';
1309          MODEL Y = RATION|SEX|X / htype=1 3 DDFM=Satterthwaite;
1310             random PEN;
1311             LSMEANS RATION|SEX / ADJUST=TUKEY PDIFF;
1312        ods output diffs=ppp;
1313        ods output lsmeans=mmm;
1314        ods listing exclude diffs;
1315        ods listing exclude lsmeans;
1316       run;
NOTE: Convergence criteria met.
NOTE: The data set WORK.MMM has 11 observations and 8 variables.
NOTE: The data set WORK.PPP has 19 observations and 12 variables.
NOTE: The PROCEDURE MIXED printed page 6.
NOTE: PROCEDURE MIXED used:
      real time           0.23 seconds
      cpu time            0.23 seconds
1317       %include 'C:\Program Files\SAS Institute\SAS\V8\stat\sample\pdmix800.sas';
1933       %pdmix800(ppp,mmm,alpha=.05,sort=yes);
 
Analysis of Covariance example from Steel & Torrie, 1980
Analysis of Covariance Example
Design with Covariable and interaction
 
The Mixed Procedure
                  Model Information
Data Set                     WORK.HOGS
Dependent Variable           Y
Covariance Structure         Variance Components
Estimation Method            REML
Residual Variance Method     Profile
Fixed Effects SE Method      Model-Based
Degrees of Freedom Method    Satterthwaite


             Class Level Information
Class     Levels    Values
RATION         3    a1 a2 a3
SEX            2    F M
PEN            5    1 2 3 4 5
 
            Dimensions
Covariance Parameters             2
Columns in X                     24
Columns in Z                      5
Subjects                          1
Max Obs Per Subject              30
Observations Used                30
Observations Not Used             0
Total Observations               30
 
                     Iteration History
Iteration    Evaluations    -2 Res Log Like       Criterion
        0              1        64.31392830
        1              2        64.21605896      0.00000001
                   Convergence criteria met.
 
Covariance Parameter Estimates
Cov Parm     Estimate
PEN           0.01370
Residual       0.2281
 
           Fit Statistics
-2 Res Log Likelihood            64.2
AIC (smaller is better)          68.2
AICC (smaller is better)         69.0
BIC (smaller is better)          67.4
 
          Type 1 Tests of Fixed Effects
                 Num     Den
Effect            DF      DF    F Value    Pr > F
RATION             2    14.2       4.97    0.0231
SEX                1    14.2       1.90    0.1890
RATION*SEX         2    14.2       1.04    0.3778
X                  1    8.89      23.41    0.0010
X*RATION           2    15.2       2.71    0.0987
X*SEX              1    16.6       0.00    0.9973
X*RATION*SEX       2    17.2       2.76    0.0910
 
          Type 3 Tests of Fixed Effects
                 Num     Den
Effect            DF      DF    F Value    Pr > F
RATION             2    16.9       4.30    0.0309
SEX                1      17       0.20    0.6633
RATION*SEX         2    17.1       2.60    0.1030
X                  1      14       6.88    0.0201
X*RATION           2    16.9       4.89    0.0211
X*SEX              1    17.1       0.49    0.4917
X*RATION*SEX       2    17.1       2.76    0.0912
 


Analysis of Covariance example from Steel & Torrie, 1980
Analysis of Covariance Example
Design with Covariable and interaction
 
Effect=RATION   Method=Tukey-Kramer(P<.05)   Comparison Group=1
 
                                    Standard    Letter     MinSig     MaxSig     AvgSig
Obs    RATION    SEX    Estimate     Error      Group        Diff       Diff       Diff
 
  1      a1               9.6343      0.1631      A        0.5666    0.58313    0.57652
  2      a2               9.3017      0.1616      AB       0.5666    0.58313    0.57652
  3      a3               9.0224      0.1699      B        0.5666    0.58313    0.57652
 
Effect=SEX   Method=Tukey-Kramer(P<.05)   Comparison Group=2
                                    Standard    Letter     MinSig     MaxSig     AvgSig
Obs    RATION    SEX    Estimate     Error      Group        Diff       Diff       Diff
  4               F       9.5240      0.1364      A       0.38597    0.38597    0.38597
  5               M       9.1149      0.1398      B       0.38597    0.38597    0.38597
 
Effect=RATION*SEX   Method=Tukey-Kramer(P<.05)   Comparison Group=3
 
                                    Standard    Letter     MinSig     MaxSig     AvgSig
Obs    RATION    SEX    Estimate     Error      Group        Diff       Diff       Diff
  6      a1       F       9.8162      0.2249      A       0.99037    1.05136    1.01377
  7      a2       F       9.5582      0.2215      A       0.99037    1.05136    1.01377
  8      a1       M       9.4523      0.2244      A       0.99037    1.05136    1.01377
  9      a3       F       9.1977      0.2265      A       0.99037    1.05136    1.01377
 10      a2       M       9.0453      0.2234      A       0.99037    1.05136    1.01377
 11      a3       M       8.8471      0.2430      A       0.99037    1.05136    1.01377
 
 
1936       PROC UNIVARIATE DATA=ResidData PLOT NORMAL; VAR resid;
1937         TITLE4 'Residual analysis with PROC UNIVARIATE';
1938       RUN;
NOTE: The PROCEDURE UNIVARIATE printed page 8.
NOTE: PROCEDURE UNIVARIATE used:
      real time           0.03 seconds
      cpu time            0.03 seconds
1938     !      QUIT;
 
 
 
Analysis of Covariance example from Steel & Torrie, 1980
Analysis of Covariance Example
Design with Covariable and interaction
Residual analysis with PROC UNIVARIATE
 
The UNIVARIATE Procedure
Variable:  Resid
 
                            Moments
N                          30    Sum Weights                 30
Mean                        0    Sum Observations             0
Std Deviation      0.42337753    Variance            0.17924854
Skewness           -0.3066408    Kurtosis            0.85642548
Uncorrected SS     5.19820755    Corrected SS        5.19820755
Coeff Variation             .    Std Error Mean      0.07729781
 
              Basic Statistical Measures
    Location                    Variability
Mean     0.000000     Std Deviation            0.42338
Median   0.075839     Variance                 0.17925
Mode      .           Range                    2.08092
                      Interquartile Range      0.45165
 


           Tests for Location: Mu0=0
Test           -Statistic-    -----p Value------
Student's t    t         0    Pr > |t|    1.0000
Sign           M         2    Pr >= |M|   0.5847
Signed Rank    S      13.5    Pr >= |S|   0.7865
 
                   Tests for Normality
Test                  --Statistic---    -----p Value------
Shapiro-Wilk          W     0.966774    Pr < W      0.4551
Kolmogorov-Smirnov    D     0.102691    Pr > D     >0.1500
Cramer-von Mises      W-Sq  0.081279    Pr > W-Sq   0.1992
Anderson-Darling      A-Sq  0.482075    Pr > A-Sq   0.2222
 
Quantiles (Definition 5)
Quantile        Estimate
100% Max       1.0338795
99%            1.0338795
95%            0.5379804
90%            0.4190551
75% Q3         0.2331595
50% Median     0.0758394
25% Q1        -0.2184919
10%           -0.5928696
5%            -0.7237573
1%            -1.0470438
0% Min        -1.0470438
 
            Extreme Observations
------Lowest------        ------Highest-----
    Value      Obs            Value      Obs
-1.047044        7         0.320395       12
-0.723757       15         0.383313       23
-0.704528       18         0.454798       20
-0.481212       22         0.537980       25
-0.452238       26         1.033880        9
 
   Stem Leaf                     #  Boxplot                        Normal Probability Plot
     10 3                        1     0         1.1+                                             *   ++
      8                                             |                                            +++++
      6                                             |                                        ++++
      4 54                       2     |            |                                   ++++* *
      2 03338928                 8  +-----+         |                             ******* *
      0 169499                   6  *--+--*         |                        *****+
     -0 641                      3  |     |         |                     ***+
     -2 84220                    5  +-----+         |                *****
     -4 85                       2     |            |           ++*+*
     -6 20                       2     |            |       ++*+*
     -8                                             |  +++++
    -10 5                        1     0        -1.1+++   *
        ----+----+----+----+                         +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+
    Multiply Stem.Leaf by 10**-1                         -2        -1         0        +1        +2
 
1941       PROC MEANS DATA=HOGS; VAR X Y;
1942             TITLE2 'Raw means';
1943       RUN;
 
Analysis of Covariance example from Steel & Torrie, 1980
Raw means
The MEANS Procedure
Variable     N            Mean         Std Dev         Minimum         Maximum
X           30      40.1000000       6.1831250      28.0000000      50.0000000
Y           30       9.3043333       0.7507545       7.6300000      10.9000000
 


1941       DATA TWO; SET HOGS; IF RATION = 'a1' THEN A = Y;
1942                           IF RATION = 'a2' THEN B = Y;
1943                           IF RATION = 'a3' THEN C = Y; RUN;
NOTE: There were 30 observations read from the data set WORK.HOGS.
NOTE: The data set WORK.TWO has 30 observations and 8 variables.
NOTE: DATA statement used:
      real time           0.02 seconds
      cpu time            0.02 seconds
1944       GOPTIONS DEVICE=cgm GSFMODE=REPLACE GSFNAME=OUT1 NOPROMPT noROTATE;
1945
1946       FILENAME OUT1 'C:\Geaghan\EXST\EXST7015New\Fall2002\SAS\25s-AnCova&Design1.cgm';
1947       PROC GPLOT DATA=TWO;
1948          TITLE1 F=SWISS H=1 'Multisource Regression Example';
1949          TITLE2 F=SWISS H=1 'Separate slopes and intercepts';
1950        PLOT A*X B*X C*X / OVERLAY HAXIS=AXIS1 VAXIS=AXIS2;
1951        AXIS1 LABEL=(F=SWISS H=1 'Initial weight (pounds)') WIDTH=5 MINOR=(N=4)
1952              VALUE=(F=SWISS H=1) ORDER=0 TO 60 BY 10;
1953        AXIS2 LABEL=(F=SWISS H=1 'Weight gain (pounds)') WIDTH=6
1954              VALUE=(F=SWISS H=1) MINOR=(N=5) ORDER=6 TO 12 BY 2;
1955           SYMBOL1 C=red   V=J I=RL  L=1 W=2 H=1 F=SPECIAL MODE=INCLUDE;
1956           SYMBOL2 C=blue  V=K I=RL  L=1 W=2 H=1 F=SPECIAL MODE=INCLUDE;
1957           SYMBOL3 C=green V=L I=RL  L=1 W=2 H=1 F=SPECIAL MODE=INCLUDE; RUN;
WARNING: The axis frame outline was drawn with line width 6 as specified on the left vertical axis. Any other axis line widths were ignored.
NOTE: Regression equation :  A =  5.598712 + 0.101766*X.
NOTE: 20 observation(s) contained a MISSING value for the A * X request.
NOTE: Regression equation :  B =  8.969529 + 0.007825*X.
NOTE: 20 observation(s) contained a MISSING value for the B * X request.
NOTE: Regression equation :  C =  5.953836 + 0.075934*X.
NOTE: 20 observation(s) contained a MISSING value for the C * X request.

NOTE:  26 RECORDS WRITTEN TO C:\Geaghan\EXST\EXST7015New\Fall2002\SAS\25s-AnCova&Design1.cgm
 
 
Which treatment is "higher"?  Where would you compare the lines?
 


1959       GOPTIONS GSFNAME=OUT2; FILENAME OUT2 'C:\Geaghan\EXST\EXST7015New\Fall2002\SAS\25s-AnCova&Design2.cgm';
NOTE: There were 30 observations read from the data set WORK.TWO.
NOTE: PROCEDURE GPLOT used:
      real time           0.19 seconds
      cpu time            0.12 seconds
1960       PROC GPLOT DATA=TWO;
1961          TITLE1 F=SWISS H=1 'Multisource Regression Example';
1962          TITLE2 F=SWISS H=1 'Single line with confidence intervals (99% cli)';
1963        PLOT Y*X / OVERLAY HAXIS=AXIS1 VAXIS=AXIS2;
1964        AXIS1 LABEL=(F=SWISS H=1 'Initial weight (pounds)') WIDTH=5 MINOR=(N=4)
1965              VALUE=(F=SWISS H=1) ORDER=0 TO 60 BY 10;
1966        AXIS2 LABEL=(F=SWISS H=1 'Weight gain (pounds)') WIDTH=6
1967              VALUE=(F=SWISS H=1) MINOR=(N=5) ORDER=6 TO 12 BY 2;
1968          SYMBOL1 C=red V=J I=RLcli99 L=1 W=2 F=SPECIAL H=1 MODE=INCLUDE;
1969       RUN;
WARNING: The axis frame outline was drawn with line width 6 as specified on the left vertical axis. Any other axis line widths were
         ignored.
NOTE: Regression equation :  Y =  6.464854 + 0.07081*X.
NOTE:  94 RECORDS WRITTEN TO C:\Geaghan\EXST\EXST7015New\Fall2002\SAS\25s-AnCova&Design1.cgm
1970
NOTE: There were 30 observations read from the data set WORK.TWO.
NOTE: PROCEDURE GPLOT used:
      real time           0.11 seconds
      cpu time            0.05 seconds
 





Modified: August 16, 2004
James P. Geaghan