Table 5. A comparison of uncertainty for unstratified, proportional-, and Neyman-allocated population estimates.

(1) Optimal re-estimation of total population (1000 simulation trials)	(2) Number of residential structures per sample	(3) Mean value of H-T estimator for 1000 trials	(4) Standard deviation of the H-T estimator	(5) Variance of the H-T estimator	(6) Standard Error of the Mean (SEM)
(A) Unstratified	990	25942	412.18	169892.35	9.26
(B) Proportional allocation	990	25950	142.23	20229.37	3.20
(C) Neyman allocation	990	25956	71.53	5116.54	1.61

A comparison of the variance σ ² and the SEM (Standard Error of the Mean) of the Horvitz-Thompson (H-T) estimator for 1,000 simulated sampling trials, and a fixed sample size of 990. For the unstratified control case (A), all sections were assigned to a single stratum, in contrast to 4-level optimal stratification using either proportional (B) or Neyman allocation (C). The stratification variable is “persons per residential structure” and Table 2, subtable 2a, specifies the samples per stratum.