|From||n j cox <firstname.lastname@example.org>|
|Subject||Re: st: L-statistic|
|Date||Fri, 25 Apr 2003 17:40:37 +0100|
Joseph Coveney wrote:
As I mentioned in the post yesterday, I couldn't find anything explicit that setting missing-value likelihood residuals to zero is standard practice.This raises an interesting general question. From a computational viewpoint, generating a Pearson residual from
But in fairness to David Collett, I think that he was justified in setting the missing-value residual to zero in this case, if that's what he did: the observed value was 1 and the predicted value was 1; that's a residual of zero.
The hitch in the whole matter arose because the Pearson residual takes the absolute residual and divides by the standard error of the predicted value, which in this case is zero.