Talk:Relationships among probability distributions

In its present form, this article seems a bit silly. But maybe some work can bring it to where it amounts to something. Michael Hardy (talk) 18:57, 7 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There is an error in the diagram. To standardize a normal random variable we must divide by sigma, not sigma squared. Richard Sessa, M.Econ. (talk) 10:46, 28 January 2015 (EST)

Should we also include the following link as reference? "https://blog.cloudera.com/blog/2015/12/common-probability-distributions-the-data-scientists-crib-sheet/"^{[dead link]} 14.136.238.193 (talk) 04:49, 15 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

LEEMIS and MCQUESTON figure

Lawrence M. LEEMIS and Jacquelyn T. MCQUESTON have a great article in The American Statistician, February 2008 that discusses the relationships between distributions. They also include a figure that shows these relationships graphically. Someone should integrate the content of the paper here.199.46.198.233 (talk) 16:52, 3 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Basic typesetting standards

X₁-X₂

X₁ − X₂

Above, in the first line, there is a hyphen rather than a full-fledged minus sign; proper spacing to the left and right of that symbol are missing, and the "X"s are not italicized. It must be that some people exist who don't notice things like that unless they are pointed out. I cleaned a lot of this up in the article. More such work is needed. Note that of course the digits 1 and 2 are not italicized, and that is NOT because they are in subscripts, but because one does not italicize digits, or puncuation, etc., in this context. See WP:MOSMATH. Michael Hardy (talk) 18:51, 20 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Error

The statement « If the exponential random variables have a common rate parameter, their sum has an Erlang distribution, a special case of the gamma distribution. » is incorrect. The line above already states that the Xi have a common rate. The link between Erlang and the gamma function is strictly because n in integer, coming from the discrete sum in this case.