Is Zero a Frequency? Miller G.A, Frick F.C. Statistical Behavioristics 1949

  • Thread starter Thread starter EasilyConfuse
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Frequency Zero
AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around a statistical equation for measuring sequence variability, derived from Miller and Frick's work on response sequences. The equation calculates variability based on the relative frequency of produced sequences, with a value of one indicating equal production and zero indicating the production of only one sequence. A key issue arises when a sequence is not produced, leading to the challenge of calculating the logarithm of zero, which is indeterminate. The dilemma is whether to include unproduced sequences in the calculations, as excluding them allows for solvable estimates but feels inelegant. The conversation highlights the mathematical complexities involved in defining frequency when zero responses are present.
EasilyConfuse
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
I've been playing with an equation that purports to provide a measure of sequence variability
Miller G.A, Frick F.C. Statistical behavioristics and sequences of responses. Psychological Review. 1949;56:311–324

If a person is asked to produce a sequence of responses and there are say 16 possible sequences the statistic is

-∑_(i=1)^16 ([RF)_i*log_2 (RF_i)])/(log_2 (16)) , where 16 equals the number of possible sequences and RFi is the relative frequency of any given sequence.

1 mean they've produced each sequence equally often, and zero that they've produced just one sequence.

So here's my problem, if someone doesn't produce a particular sequence I'm then faced with the conundram do I use a relative frequency of zero? If I do I'm then faced with the problem of trying to calculate log base 2 of zero and also multiply that by zero in the numerator - the solution to this is indeterminate and I can't solve it. So either I ignore sequences that weren't produced when summing across relative frequencies - if I do then I can avoid trying solve for log 2 (0), and I can solve this problem - or at least get estimates of U that are bigger when . But this seems very inelegant. Any thoughts on this would be helpful.
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Lim (x->0) of xlog(x) = 0, for any base.
 
Suppose ,instead of the usual x,y coordinate system with an I basis vector along the x -axis and a corresponding j basis vector along the y-axis we instead have a different pair of basis vectors ,call them e and f along their respective axes. I have seen that this is an important subject in maths My question is what physical applications does such a model apply to? I am asking here because I have devoted quite a lot of time in the past to understanding convectors and the dual...
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...

Similar threads

Back
Top