Introduction The Quantitative Ability Test (QAT) is part II of the Stratosphere test; an extended battery of the Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT) from 1974 - 1994 to create a reliable measure of intellectual ability up to the highest level. The QAT was co nstructed using a complete SAT Math Test from 198 1 . The QAT ceiling was extended by selecting 10 items across a difficulty gradient . 6 of the items were selected from a pool of GREs between 1989 and 1992, normalized on a sample of 1,135,982 students applying to graduate school. 4 were taken selectively from SATMs from 1979 - 1986 as they were anomalously hard and estimated to be sufficiently difficult. These items represented a sample of the hardest items ever normalized and released by the College Boa rd. Preliminary Data Data collection: As of 3/29/2021, 122 attempts of Stratosphere were taken. Attempts were removed for any of the following reasons: 1. Blatant trolling or otherwise advising me not to use the data. 2. Incomplete test 3. More than one attempt (only the first attempt was counted). The final count of acceptable attempts was N = 76 Professional Tests vs QAT 3 3 Non - Verbal Professional Test scores were reported and acceptable, with an average IQ of 140. A wide range of tests were put forth by most candidates; the following analysis is a composite average of all reported tests for each testee . The tests were averaged, unweighted. Accepted tests include : WAIS PRI (FSIQ was used if PRI maxed ), Stanford Binet, RIAS, TRI - 52, Ravens 2, TONI - 2, CFIT and Cattell. Descriptive Statistics N Range Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation Statistic Statistic Statistic Statistic Statistic Std. Error Statistic Protests 34 60.00 110.00 170.00 139.9706 2.30997 13.46935 SATM 34 56.00 100.00 156.00 130.0294 2.62664 15.31584 Valid N (listwise) 34 All Professional tests correlated with the QAT at r = 0.77 uncorrected. WAIS vs QAT 18 WAIS PRI scores (if PRI was maxed, and FSIQ was higher, it was substituted) were submitted and acceptable. WAIS correlated with the QAT at r = 0.75 uncorrected. Descriptive Statistics N Range Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation Statistic Statistic Statistic Statistic Statistic Std. Error Statistic WAIS 18 59.00 111.00 170.00 139.6667 3.56270 15.11524 SMATH 18 52.00 104.00 156.00 132.2778 3.80128 16.12745 Valid N (listwise) 18 Raven’s 2 vs QAT 20 scores were reported and acceptable for Raven’s 2. The correlation between Raven’s 2 and the QAT was r=0.52 uncorrected. The mean difference between the tests was larger than the average difference at a statistically significant level. Raven’s 2 is the only prof essional test which produced such a discrepancy. Descriptive Statistics N Range Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation Statistic Statistic Statistic Statistic Statistic Std. Error Statistic RavensTwo 20 34.00 126.00 160.00 144.8500 1.46588 6.55563 ScATM 20 49.00 105.00 154.00 127.7500 3.37785 15.10620 Valid N (listwise) 20 Stratosphere VAI vs QAT Among those that submitted both the Stratosphere VAI and QAT, the correlation between the subtests was r=0.39 uncorrected. IQExams vs Stratosphere VAI + QAT 22 people submitted IQexam scores and either VAI (16) or QAT (6). QAT scores were renormalized and corrected before analysis. Aggregate averages of IQexam scores were taken . The correlation between the two was r = 0.73 uncorrected. Note: the mean difference was significant. Descriptive Statistics N Range Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation Statistic Statistic Statistic Statistic Statistic Std. Error Statistic IQE 22 51.00 115.00 166.00 145.5455 2.80208 13.14290 S 22 68.00 98.00 166.00 128.5455 3.47516 16.29995 Valid N (listwise) 22 Age vs Stratosphere and QAT There was no relationship between age and score on both Stratosphere VAI and QAT. Time vs QAT While there was no correlation between time used and score, most people used all available time. Timing for the test was identical to the SATM, at 1 minute given per question, and an additio nal 1.5 minutes per question was given for the ceiling extension items. Time pressure and processing speed were more integral to QAT performance than it was to Stratosphere performance where the overwhelming majority finished with significant time left. Reliability At N= 76 , all measures of reliability were deemed very high. Reliability w as very similar to Stratosphere Verbal Ability Index. Reliability Statistics Cronbach's Alpha N of Items .936 70 Reliability Statistics Cronbach's Alpha Part 1 Value .816 N of Items 35 a Part 2 Value .923 N of Items 35 b Total N of Items 70 Correlation Between Forms .797 Spearman - Brown Coefficient Equal Length .887 Unequal Length .887 Guttman Split - Half Coefficient .832 a. The items are: q1, q2, q3, q4, q5, q6, q7, q8, q9, q10, q11, q12, q13, q14, q15, q16, q17, q18, q19, q20, q21, q22, q23, q24, q25, q26, q27, q28, q29, q30, q31, q32, q33, q34, q35. b. The items are: q36, q37, q38, q39, q40, q41, q42, q43, q44, q45, q46, q47, q48, qq49, q50, q51, q52, q53, q54, q55, q56, q57, q58, q59, q60, q61, q62, q63, q64, q65, q66, q67, q68, q69, q70. 15 H ardest Questions Q %correct 47 57% SAT M 51 47% SAT M 27 47% SAT M 65 42% SAT M 66 42% ceiling extension 56 39% ceiling extension 67 38 % ceiling extension 19 34% SAT M 57 34% ceiling extension 28 30% ceiling extension 70 28% ceiling extension 68 2 6% ceiling extension 26 25% ceiling extension 69 22% ceiling extension 58 17% ceiling extension The distribution of ceiling extension items was very close to estimated best fit for increasing the difficulty of the test. All ceiling extension items showed g ood loadings and excellent ability to discriminate at the level above the SATM ceiling. Factor Analysis G - loadings (h^2, or communal ities) were all excellent. Normalization - QAT Due to significant discrepancies between professional test scores and estimated scores, the test was completely renormalized. Version 2 of the normalization follows. Score SATM IQ 70 900 170 69 880 168 68 870 167 67 860 165 66 8 5 0 164 65 8 4 0 162 64 8 3 0 161 63 8 20 159 62 8 10 158 61 800 15 7 60 790 15 6 59 780 15 4 58 780 15 3 57 770 15 1 56 760 1 50 55 750 14 8 54 750 14 6 53 740 14 4 52 730 14 2 51 720 140 50 710 13 8 49 700 13 6 48 700 13 4 47 690 13 3 46 680 13 1 45 670 129 44 660 128 43 650 127 42 640 126 41 630 125 40 620 124 39 610 123 38 610 122 37 600 121 36 590 120 35 580 118 34 570 117 33 560 116 32 550 115 31 540 114 30 530 113 29 520 112 28 510 110 27 500 109 26 490 108 25 480 107 24 470 106 23 460 105 22 450 104 21 440 103 20 430 102 19 420 101 18 410 100 17 400 99 16 400 98 15 390 97 14 380 96 13 370 95 12 360 93 11 350 91 10 340 89 9 330 87 8 320 85 7 310 83 6 300 81 5 290 79 4 280 77 3 270 75 2 260 73 1 250 71 0 240 69 Stratosphere VAI + QAT Normalization The Stratosphere VAI + QAT scores can be added to produce a composite IQ that would approximate closely a FSIQ or GAI. Version 1 of the normalization follows. Strato V + M IQ 1850 192 1840 1 90 1830 189 1820 18 7 1810 18 6 1800 18 4 1790 18 3 1780 18 1 1770 180 1760 179 1750 178 1740 177 1730 176 1720 175 1710 174 1700 173 1690 172 1680 171 1670 170 1660 169 1650 168 1640 167 1630 166 1620 165 1610 164 1600 163 1590 162 1580 161 1570 160 1560 159 1550 158 1540 157 1530 156 1520 155 1510 154 1500 153 1490 152 1480 151 1470 150 1460 149 1450 148 1440 147 1430 146 1420 145 1410 144 1400 143 1390 142 1380 141 1370 140 1360 140 1350 139 1340 138 1330 137 1320 136 1310 135 1300 134 1290 133 1280 132 1270 131 1260 130 1250 130 1240 129 1230 12 9 1220 12 8 1210 12 7 1200 12 6 1190 12 5 1180 12 4 1170 12 3 1160 12 2 1150 12 1 1140 1 20 1130 11 9 1120 11 8 1110 11 7 1100 11 6 1090 11 5 1080 11 4 1070 11 3 1060 11 3 1050 11 2 1040 1 12 1030 1 11 1020 1 11 1010 1 10 1000 1 10 990 10 9 980 10 9 970 10 8 960 10 8 950 10 7 940 10 7 930 10 6 920 10 6 910 10 5 900 10 5 890 1 04 880 104 870 103 860 103 850 102 840 102 830 101 820 101 810 100 800 100 790 99 780 99 770 98 760 97 750 9 6 700 90 650 86 600 81 550 7 5 500 69 Discussion and Conclusion Project Stratosphere was a success. Both the Verbal Ability Index and the Quant it ative Ability Test are excellent measures g, showing high reliability, item quality and correlations with professional IQ tests. This validates t he commonly held position that the 1974 - 1994 SAT was an excellent measure of intellectual ability. The hypothesis that the ceiling of the SAT could be greatly extended by using carefully selected items was supported by the evidence. The goal for the near future will be to have the test hosted so scoring can be easily automated for all interested parties. Thanks go out to all those that participated in data collection. Note: please submit any inquiries to u/EqusB and not u/EqusG.