Difference between revisions of "Talk:Probability density function"

From Conservapedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Continuity of a pdf)
 
m (redundant definition?)
Line 3: Line 3:
 
Obviously, a probability density function isn't necessarily continuous, take, e.g., the uniform distribution on [0,1] which has a rectangular function as pdf. I changed this in the article.
 
Obviously, a probability density function isn't necessarily continuous, take, e.g., the uniform distribution on [0,1] which has a rectangular function as pdf. I changed this in the article.
 
--[[User:BRichtigen|BRichtigen]] 08:01, 6 December 2008 (EST)
 
--[[User:BRichtigen|BRichtigen]] 08:01, 6 December 2008 (EST)
 +
 +
== Definition? ==
 +
Maybe I'm missing something obvious here, but doesn't criterion (3) follow from criterion (1)? If that's the case it ought to be stated as a theorem and not part of the definition.  (Of course, the reverse implication doesn't hold without a continuity assumption, so these aren't equivalent statements.) --[[User:MarkGall|MarkGall]] 01:06, 31 August 2009 (EDT)

Revision as of 05:06, August 31, 2009

Continuity of a pdf

Obviously, a probability density function isn't necessarily continuous, take, e.g., the uniform distribution on [0,1] which has a rectangular function as pdf. I changed this in the article. --BRichtigen 08:01, 6 December 2008 (EST)

Definition?

Maybe I'm missing something obvious here, but doesn't criterion (3) follow from criterion (1)? If that's the case it ought to be stated as a theorem and not part of the definition. (Of course, the reverse implication doesn't hold without a continuity assumption, so these aren't equivalent statements.) --MarkGall 01:06, 31 August 2009 (EDT)