In the trail of State of Arizona vs. Wayne James Nelson, the defendant was accus
ID: 2958159 • Letter: I
Question
In the trail of State of Arizona vs. Wayne James Nelson, the defendantwas accused of issuing checks to a vendor that did not really exist. The
amounts of the checks are listed below in order by row.Benford’s law, it is necessary to combine categories because not all expected values are at least 5. Use one category with leading digits of 1, a second category with leading digits of 2, 3, 4, 5, and the third category with leading category with leading digits of 6, 7, 8, and 9. Using a o.oo1 significance level, is there sufficient evidence to conclude that the leading digits on the checks do not conform to benford's law?
$1,927.48 27,902.31 86,241.90 72,117.46 81,321.75 97,473.96
93,249.11 89,658.16 87,776.89 92,105.83 79,949.16 87,602.93
96,879.27 91,806.47 84,991.67 90,831.83 93,766.67 88,336.72
94,639.49 83,709.26 96,412.21 88,432.86 71,552.16
Explanation / Answer
IGNORE