Talk:List of probability distributions
|WikiProject Statistics||(Rated List-class, Mid-importance)|
- I'd assumed they were all the default thumbnail size, but in fact they're all set to 150px width. I can see no reason for this, so I'll change them to the default thumbnail size if no-one objects. That's 180px by default but can be altered by logged-in users in their user preferences. I can't see any justification in the guidelines at MOS:IMAGES for forcing a particular size in this case. Qwfp (talk) 15:02, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
Name of a distribution?
Is there any special name for a distribution that is like the juxtaposition of two uniforms? The pdf would be (for a < b < c) p for a < x < b and q for b < x < c (obviously, with p(b-a) + q(c-b) = 1). Albmont (talk) 13:03, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
- Not as far as I know. I guess it's a mixture of a U(a,b) and a U(b,c) distribution. Qwfp (talk) 15:02, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
Explanation of "support"
It would be great if someone could add an explanation of the word "support", as it is used throughout this article, and without an understanding of that term, the main distinction between distributions is missed. Gwideman (talk) 20:13, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
there's mention of a "suzuki distribution"
should we add it to the List of Probability Distributions?
I'm in no ways an expert, but I believe the List also lacks the negative hypergeometric distrib.
listing the Gumbel as a special case of the Fisher-Trippet?
Does it make sense to list the Gumbel distribution only as a special case of the generalized EV distribution? After all the Weibull (another special case of the generalized EV) has its own entry. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cbauckhage (talk • contribs) 18:12, 28 February 2013 (UTC)
- Hello Cbauckhage, I agree with your comment and put the Gumbel distribution on its own feet. Now why don't you go ahead and erase the mention "a special case of the Fisher–Tippett distribution"? 99 out of a 100 continuous distributions are a special case of another distribution, so the mention doesn't make much sense to me either. Regards: --Herbmuell (talk) 16:56, 20 July 2015 (UTC)
- Nobody seems interested, so I went ahead and deleted the "special case of..."-mention.Herbmuell (talk) 08:02, 23 July 2015 (UTC)
I first heard about the inverse exponential distribution from this paper: http://www.socsci.uci.edu/~sskaperd/JSVdraft4d.pdf
 - I found another reference that uses fewer parameters to specify the inverse exponential distribution (http://www.beanactuary.org/exams/preliminary/4C/A_Inv_Cont_Dist.html) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.8.131.52 (talk) 23:37, 19 March 2013 (UTC)