Talk:Empirical distribution function

Mathematics Start‑class Low‑priority

	Mathematics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mathematics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of mathematics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MathematicsWikipedia:WikiProject MathematicsTemplate:WikiProject Mathematicsmathematics
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-priority on the project's priority scale.

Statistics C‑class High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Statistics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of statistics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.StatisticsWikipedia:WikiProject StatisticsTemplate:WikiProject StatisticsStatistics
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale.

"Logical problems" section

This section either needs serious rework or to be removed entirely. It reads like gibberish and isn't particularly relevant to the article topic. 74.124.58.202 (talk) 17:02, 21 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A visual example

would be helpful here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.90.143.154 (talk) 13:13, 13 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I just created a visualization and added it. Bscan (talk) 15:15, 25 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Quantile Function

Isn't it generally both easier to both generate and use the quantile function when using empirical or simulated data? If so then, yes the "Empirical Distribution Function" is an analog to the cdf, but we might restructure this article to emphasize that when one wishes to empirically characterize a distribution it is more common to do so via quantiles.Dbooksta (talk) 01:09, 20 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Empirical distribution function. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130509235041/http://planetmath.org/empiricaldistributionfunction to http://planetmath.org/empiricaldistributionfunction

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:19, 24 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Graph needs to be redrawn

The lead contains this image:

This graph is self-contradictory: The true population cumulative distribution reaches 1 at about X = 3, meaning that in the entire population there is no value greater than 3. But the empirical distribution function shows that there is a value of about 3.5 sampled from that population, which is impossible.

Can someone please redraw the graph to fix this? Thanks. Loraof (talk) 22:09, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]