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

From |
"Nick Cox" <n.j.cox@durham.ac.uk> |

To |
<statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu> |

Subject |
RE: st: RE: Hypergeometric Distribution |

Date |
Thu, 23 Aug 2007 10:25:03 +0100 |

Consider comb(K, k) * comb(N - K, n - k) / comb(N, n) When I look at that, my main worry would be that the numerator could get rather large before it is scaled down by the denominator. Hence I would try exp(ln(comb(K, k)) + ln(comb(N - k, n - k)) - ln(comb(N, n))) as a check. I know that 0s will become missings, but it's my understanding that in such cases the resulting probabilities should all be 0 in any case. It may be that any StataCorp function, say hyperg(N, n, K, k), would be just be this underneath. But perhaps not. Nick n.j.cox@durham.ac.uk Marcello Pagano > The hypergeometric plays a central role in sampling when > sampling from a > finite population. The binomial provides an approximation for large > samples, but why rely on approximations today when they are not > necessary? and how good is the approximation, anyway? Possibly the > reliance on the approximation provided by the binomial has lulled us > into a complacency that contributed to the "evidence since 1999"? > > I did research a little with -comb( )- and that works pretty > well, but I > did a very limited study. A Stata function with all its usual > associated robustness and accuracy would be nice, in my opinion. Nick Cox > >>>>> Roger's posting includes what I presume is an allusion to > >>>>> an -egen- function _ghyper.ado that I wrote in 1999. > >>>>> > >>>>> I withdrew this program as redundant some years ago, > >>>>> given that you can use something like > >>>>> > >>>>> comb(K, k) * comb(N - K, n - k) / comb(N, n) > >>>>> > >>>>> wherever you want. In context N, K, n, k may be > >>>>> variables, scalars or placeholders for numeric > >>>>> constants, or any mixture thereof. > >>>>> > >>>>> This might need a wrapper to yield zeros where > >>>>> appropriate, or it might need care whenever > >>>>> individual terms get very large, but otherwise > >>>>> does it raise any problems? Marcello Pagano > >>>>>> Does anyone have or know of Stata code to calculate the > >>>> Hypergeometric Distribution accurately? > >>>>>> > >>>>>> See Journal of Discrete Algorithms , Volume 5 , Issue 2 > >>>>>> > >>>> (June 2007) > >>>> > >>>>>> Pages: 341-347 for an article by Berkopec, HyperQuick > >>>> algorithm for discrete hypergeometric distribution > > <http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1240586&coll=GUIDE&dl=GUIDE&CFID= * * 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/

**References**:**Re: st: RE: Hypergeometric Distribution***From:*Marcello Pagano <pagano@hsph.harvard.edu>

- Prev by Date:
**st: estout - betas** - Next by Date:
**st: Restriction on Parameter Values in NL Estimation** - Previous by thread:
**Re: st: RE: Hypergeometric Distribution** - Next by thread:
**st: wrapper for use** - Index(es):

© Copyright 1996–2016 StataCorp LP | Terms of use | Privacy | Contact us | What's new | Site index |