The chi square goodness-of-fit test with no degrees of freedom left

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the chi-square goodness-of-fit test, particularly in scenarios where there are no degrees of freedom left due to the number of parameters equaling the number of data points. The example provided illustrates that with three measurements and two parameters, one degree of freedom remains, allowing for the calculation of chi-square values. The calculations yield different results based on the inclusion of additional scores, demonstrating that the choice of probability model significantly impacts the goodness-of-fit assessment.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of chi-square goodness-of-fit tests
  • Familiarity with empirical frequency distributions
  • Knowledge of degrees of freedom in statistical models
  • Basic statistical modeling concepts
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the implications of degrees of freedom in statistical tests
  • Learn about the chi-square test calculations and interpretations
  • Explore different probability models and their fit to data
  • Investigate the impact of parameter estimation on goodness-of-fit tests
USEFUL FOR

Statisticians, data analysts, researchers conducting hypothesis testing, and anyone involved in statistical modeling and analysis of empirical data distributions.

Ad VanderVen
Messages
169
Reaction score
13
TL;DR
How to deal with a chi square goodness-of-fit test if the number of degrees of freedom is equal to zero?
I have an empirical frequency distribution as for example below:

##f_{2} = \, \, \, 21##
##f_{3} = 111##
##f_{4} = \, \, \, 24##

The theoretical distribution is determined by two parameters. So for a chi-square goodness-of-fit test there are actually no degrees of freedom left. Yet the theoretical distribution deviates from the observed distribution. The fact that there are no degrees of freedom left does not ensure that the theoretical and the observed distribution coincide. Can you still say something about the goodness-of-fit ?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
If you have three measurements and two parameters, you have one degree of freedom.

An example of zero degrees of freedom would be a linear fit to two points. In that case there is no goodness of fit information.
 
For the theoretical distribution ##P (X = k)## it holds in this case that ##k = 2, 3, 4 \dots ##. If I calculate chi square for the scores ##2, 3, 4## with expected values ##NP (X = 2)##, ##NP (X = 3)## and ##NP (X \geq 4)## then I get .381, but if I compute chi square for the scores ##2, 3, 4## and ##5##, where ##f_{5} = 0## with expected value ##NP(X = 2)##, ##NP(X = 3)##, ##NP (X = 4)## and ##NP(X \geq 5)## then get I as a result 3.719 and that would be significant with one degree of freedom.
 
I don't see how your second message has anything to do with your first. Your first measurement has 3 measurements and 2 parameters - i.e. one degree of freedom.
 
I thought the number of degrees of freedom (##df##) was equal to the number of classes minus the number of estimated parameters minus 1. So in this case for ##f_{2} = \, \, \, 21##, ##f_{3} = 111## and ##f_{4} = \, \, \, 24## one would expect ##df = 0## (##= 3-2-1##).
 
I don't know what you mean by "class". You have X data points and Y fit parameters, so you have X-Y degrees of freedom. So if, as your OP says, you have 3 data points and 2 parameters in your model, you have one degree of freedom.
 
Ad VanderVen said:
but if I compute chi square for the scores ##2, 3, 4## and ##5##, where ##f_{5} = 0## with expected value ##NP(X = 2)##, ##NP(X = 3)##, ##NP (X = 4)## and ##NP(X \geq 5)## then get I as a result 3.719 and that would be significant with one degree of freedom.

You are comparing two different probability models to the same data, so isn't surprising that you get different measures of fit. The first probability model makes no prediction for X=4. The second one does.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
9K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K