Statalist The Stata Listserver


[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date index][Thread index]

Re: st: Pareto v. lognormal


From   "Stas Kolenikov" <skolenik@gmail.com>
To   statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu
Subject   Re: st: Pareto v. lognormal
Date   Tue, 6 Mar 2007 21:22:07 -0600

On 3/6/07, Austin Nichols <austinnichols@gmail.com> wrote:
Stas, Patrick, et al.--
The rationale for using ln(f(x)) instead of ln(1-F) is that I can
write down ln(f(x)) for both the Pareto and lognormal families, and I
can't write down F for the lognormal.
hmm... norm( (ln(x) - mu)/sigma ), in Stata's probability distributions slang?

There's a wealth of theory and tests behind various versions of
quantile plots (NJC mentioned some of those and their implementations
in Stata), and I tend to think those are more reputable than tests
based on kernel estimates, for which you have non-parametric
convergence rates, and need to worry about the optimal bandwidths. So
the theory and inference is moderately ugly there.

--
Stas Kolenikov
http://stas.kolenikov.name
*
*   For searches and help try:
*   http://www.stata.com/support/faqs/res/findit.html
*   http://www.stata.com/support/statalist/faq
*   http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/



© Copyright 1996–2014 StataCorp LP   |   Terms of use   |   Privacy   |   Contact us   |   What's new   |   Site index