Distribution of Non-Gaussian Data: Analysis & Presentation

JohnFishy
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
Any help would be much appreciated.

The problem lies in the non-Gaussian distribution of the sample. If we take the entire data set of total fish catch, the skewness statistic equals 7.463 with a std. error of skewness of 0.39. Accordingly, the Z dist. (7.463/0.39)=19.14. Overall, the mean=8.75, std deviation=15.27, and std. error of mean=.245, median=4.5, range=299.97. Percentiles at 25%=2, 50%=4.5, and 75%=9.7. here is a histogram of the entire data set: http://imgur.com/4nHCyRl. I would like to split the data into season so what kind of correlations can be applicable in this scenario with such a non-normally distributed data set? Likewise, how would one present this data? the std deviation is almost twice as large as the mean. Would you use std error of mean instead?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hi John,

Are you familiar with the Poisson (:smile:) distribution ? If not, then you should read up on it.
 
BvU said:
Hi John,

Are you familiar with the Poisson (:smile:) distribution ? If not, then you should read up on it.

A Poisson distribution can not have a standard deviation that is double that of the mean.

It might be a gamma for example though.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes BvU
Yeah, well some guys catch nothing and others hook 250. So the question is: what are we looking at, dear JohnFishy ?
From looking at the other thread I suspect we are looking at 4765 kg of bird caught by 400 people ?
So 12 kilogram of bird on average, and we are trying to find a standard deviation to accompany this 12 kg ?
 
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.
Back
Top