Undergrad Discrete to continuum Gaussian function

Click For Summary
The discussion centers on the transition from discrete to continuous Gaussian functions as described in Knoll's "Radiation Detection and Measurement." It highlights that when the mean value of a discrete Gaussian distribution is large, adjacent probabilities are similar, allowing for a smooth transition to a continuous Gaussian. The link between the two statements is rooted in the concept of continuity, suggesting that as the number of observations increases, the difference between discrete and continuous representations diminishes. The conversation also touches on the characteristics of probability density functions (PDFs), noting that while PDFs are typically piecewise continuous, the Gaussian function is inherently smooth. This indicates an assumption by the author regarding the continuity of the Gaussian distribution.
Aleolomorfo
Messages
70
Reaction score
4
I have a question regarding a paragraph in "Radiation detection and measurement" by Knoll.
In the chapter about the discrete Gaussian it states that "Because the mean value of the distribution ##\bar{x}## is large , values of ##P(x)## for adjacent values of x are not greatly different from each other. In other words, the distribution is slowly varying". Then it states that, because of this property, we can modify the discrete Gaussian to a continuos Gaussian.
I do not understand the link between the two statements.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Don't know about the context, but it seems to me this refers to the analysis definition of continuity (*), to justify using a function to describe a discrete distribution. Something like "if we let the number of observations go to infinity, the relative difference between the discrete and the continuous description will go to zero"

(*) For all ##\varepsilon > 0## there is a ##\delta > 0 ## such that ... etc.
 
Yes. Indeed, he goes from binomial via Poisson to Gauss, initially only 'defined' for discrete ##x##. Then generalizes to a continuous Gaussian. That wouldn't work if the discrete function would not smooth out (e.g. as with the function int(x) )
 
But aren't PDFs required to just be piecewise continuous? I mean, we do know the Gaussian is continuous, even smooth. Maybe the author is assuming this?
 
The standard _A " operator" maps a Null Hypothesis Ho into a decision set { Do not reject:=1 and reject :=0}. In this sense ( HA)_A , makes no sense. Since H0, HA aren't exhaustive, can we find an alternative operator, _A' , so that ( H_A)_A' makes sense? Isn't Pearson Neyman related to this? Hope I'm making sense. Edit: I was motivated by a superficial similarity of the idea with double transposition of matrices M, with ## (M^{T})^{T}=M##, and just wanted to see if it made sense to talk...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
3K