Pearson's correlation coefficient suggests that effective spacing has a large positive correlation (r = 0.68) with the outcome, capture efficiency. Flow discharge has a negative correlation (r = −0.53) with capture efficiency, and runtime has a positive correlation (r = 0.49). All these results are statistically significant with P < 0.001 (see Table 3).
Results using the LHS method for 10,000 data
| . | Correlations . | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| . | . | Capture efficiency (%) . | Runtime (min) . | Flow (L/s) . | Effective spacing (mm) . |
| Pearson correlation | Capture efficiency (%) | 1.00 | 0.49 | − 0.53 | 0.68 |
| Runtime (min) | 0.49 | 1.00 | 0.01 | 0.01 | |
| Flow (L/s) | − 0.53 | 0.01 | 1.00 | 0.01 | |
| Effective spacing (mm) | 0.68 | 0.01 | 0.01 | 1.00 | |
| Sig. (1-tailed) | Capture efficiency (%) | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | |
| Runtime (min) | 0.02 | 0.12 | 0.31 | ||
| Flow (L/s) | 0.00 | 0.12 | 0.18 | ||
| Effective spacing (mm) | 0.00 | 0.31 | 0.18 | ||
| . | Correlations . | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| . | . | Capture efficiency (%) . | Runtime (min) . | Flow (L/s) . | Effective spacing (mm) . |
| Pearson correlation | Capture efficiency (%) | 1.00 | 0.49 | − 0.53 | 0.68 |
| Runtime (min) | 0.49 | 1.00 | 0.01 | 0.01 | |
| Flow (L/s) | − 0.53 | 0.01 | 1.00 | 0.01 | |
| Effective spacing (mm) | 0.68 | 0.01 | 0.01 | 1.00 | |
| Sig. (1-tailed) | Capture efficiency (%) | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | |
| Runtime (min) | 0.02 | 0.12 | 0.31 | ||
| Flow (L/s) | 0.00 | 0.12 | 0.18 | ||
| Effective spacing (mm) | 0.00 | 0.31 | 0.18 | ||