Calculating Gini Coefficient - Unbiased Estimator

  • Thread starter Thread starter Jrb599
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Coefficient
Jrb599
Messages
24
Reaction score
0
Hi I was looking at how to calculate the GINI coefficient and saw two different statements from two websites.

Statement 1:
It has been shown that the sample Gini coefficients defined above need to be multiplied by in order to become unbiased estimators for the population coefficients -http://mathworld.wolfram.com/GiniCoefficient.html

Statement 2:
There does not exist a sample statistic that is in general an unbiased estimator of the population Gini coefficient, like the relative mean difference.-http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gini_coefficient


My assumption is because wolfram is using Mu and not X-bar. Any thoughts/help?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
That's an interesting conflict. Perhaps the \mu mentioned on the Wolfram page is the population mean instead of the sample mean.
 
that's what I thought; however, the relative mean difference doesn't have a mu in it, and it doesn't have a unbiased estimator either
 
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Fermat's Last Theorem has long been one of the most famous mathematical problems, and is now one of the most famous theorems. It simply states that the equation $$ a^n+b^n=c^n $$ has no solutions with positive integers if ##n>2.## It was named after Pierre de Fermat (1607-1665). The problem itself stems from the book Arithmetica by Diophantus of Alexandria. It gained popularity because Fermat noted in his copy "Cubum autem in duos cubos, aut quadratoquadratum in duos quadratoquadratos, et...
Thread 'Imaginary Pythagorus'
I posted this in the Lame Math thread, but it's got me thinking. Is there any validity to this? Or is it really just a mathematical trick? Naively, I see that i2 + plus 12 does equal zero2. But does this have a meaning? I know one can treat the imaginary number line as just another axis like the reals, but does that mean this does represent a triangle in the complex plane with a hypotenuse of length zero? Ibix offered a rendering of the diagram using what I assume is matrix* notation...
Back
Top