Computing Statistical Distributions: A Practical Guide

Hurkyl
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
Messages
14,922
Reaction score
28
How does one go about actually computing various statistical tables, rather than looking them up?

Things of interest at the moment are the cumulative distributions and their inverses, for the standard normal and both central and noncentral chi squares.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I typically resort to curve fitting (regression analysis) rather than using the tables overall, basic (nonlinear) least squares and maximum likelihood methods for one work pretty well for most common distributions.
 
I don't know if I can use that for my purposes... one of the particular questions I'd like to answer is how many data points I need for the false positive rate of my test to be less than 2-20. (And I might be being conservative on just how small I want the rate)

Actually... now that I think about it, I might be outside the domain where the normal approximation is reasonable for my simpler test. (or a nonlinear Chi square approximation for the more complicated test) Blech.

Anyways, the simpler test was testing a sample mean for being nonzero, when the statistic is approximately normally distributed with variance 1. The more complicated one was the same spirit, except I was summing squares of many of these statistics.
 
Last edited:
Hurkyl said:
How does one go about actually computing various statistical tables, rather than looking them up?

Things of interest at the moment are the cumulative distributions and their inverses, for the standard normal and both central and noncentral chi squares.

Do you have access to Mathematica? That's what I'd use.
 
Hi all, I've been a roulette player for more than 10 years (although I took time off here and there) and it's only now that I'm trying to understand the physics of the game. Basically my strategy in roulette is to divide the wheel roughly into two halves (let's call them A and B). My theory is that in roulette there will invariably be variance. In other words, if A comes up 5 times in a row, B will be due to come up soon. However I have been proven wrong many times, and I have seen some...
Thread 'Detail of Diagonalization Lemma'
The following is more or less taken from page 6 of C. Smorynski's "Self-Reference and Modal Logic". (Springer, 1985) (I couldn't get raised brackets to indicate codification (Gödel numbering), so I use a box. The overline is assigning a name. The detail I would like clarification on is in the second step in the last line, where we have an m-overlined, and we substitute the expression for m. Are we saying that the name of a coded term is the same as the coded term? Thanks in advance.

Similar threads

Back
Top