Definition talk:Sample

Is it always the case that a sample must be a proper subset? I envisage the case being such that for particularly small populations, the sample size can equal the population size. --prime mover (talk) 21:20, 10 September 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm quite sure that that's the definition I'm using in my course. It could be that some texts define it as any subset, even the whole set. --GFauxPas (talk) 22:48, 10 September 2012 (UTC)
 * The trouble with using lecture notes as source works is that they are not necessarily telling the whole story and can not be relied upon to be rigorous. In the typical case they are assembled quickly, off the top of the lecturer's head, in order to present some materials efficiently and understandably, so as to provide some easily-assimilable background info. As such they are never going to be as fully rigorous as a textbook on the subject. --prime mover (talk) 05:23, 11 September 2012 (UTC)
 * I hear that. Except I've had this professor twice before, and both times he has been more rigorous and precise than the textbooks. --GFauxPas (talk) 13:05, 11 September 2012 (UTC)
 * All of the books I've found in my college's library had it as a proper subset, so I'm going with that until I find a source that says otherwise. --GFauxPas (talk) 16:34, 11 September 2012 (UTC)


 * To avoid all ambiguity, please use $\subsetneq$ in place of $\subset$. --Lord_Farin (talk) 21:54, 12 September 2012 (UTC)