network profile
| bio | website | |
|---|---|---|
| location | ||
| age | ||
| visits | member for | 8 months |
| seen | Apr 9 at 9:24 | |
| stats | profile views | 9 |
|
Mar 26 |
comment |
Empirical Cumulative Distribution Function I accepted kirma's answer because it came first and gives an exact solution. I however upvoted your answer because it is a useful approximation (and works directly with Mathematica 8). Thanks! |
|
Mar 26 |
comment |
Empirical Cumulative Distribution Function @kirma Thanks. Very useful (works alright with Mathematica 8 as you suggest). Yes, I am dealing with empirical data, so I don't know exactly the data generating process and would hence prefer not to impose any parametric assumptions (and some of my other plots seem to fit less neatly normal distributions). |
|
Mar 26 |
accepted | Empirical Cumulative Distribution Function |
|
Mar 25 |
revised |
Empirical Cumulative Distribution Function added 188 characters in body |
|
Mar 25 |
asked | Empirical Cumulative Distribution Function |
|
Mar 17 |
accepted | Error with minimization of NProbability |
|
Mar 14 |
awarded | Teacher |
|
Mar 14 |
revised |
Error with minimization of NProbability added 31 characters in body |
|
Mar 14 |
answered | Error with minimization of NProbability |
|
Mar 14 |
revised |
Error with minimization of NProbability added 225 characters in body |
|
Mar 14 |
asked | Error with minimization of NProbability |
|
Feb 27 |
awarded | Supporter |
|
Feb 27 |
accepted | Invalid comparison in RegionPlot |
|
Feb 27 |
asked | Invalid comparison in RegionPlot |
|
Sep 10 |
awarded | Scholar |
|
Sep 10 |
accepted | wrong use of _?NumberQ? |
|
Sep 10 |
comment |
wrong use of _?NumberQ? Thanks. I had tried what you suggest and it didn't work --in fact, when I copy/pasted your code and ran it, it didn't work at first... It turns out (I just realize) that the introduction of ?NumberQ in the definition of the function has to be done on a clean function (it doesn't replace an existing definition). In the end, the solution is indeed to use f[a_, b_, x_?NumericQ] BUT clearing f[] beforehand (don't know if this is obvious but it cost me a lot of time). |
|
Sep 10 |
awarded | Student |
|
Sep 10 |
comment |
wrong use of _?NumberQ? Thanks, yes; the problem is that the constraint is nonalgebraic. I edited the question above and included a complete example at the end. |
|
Sep 10 |
revised |
wrong use of _?NumberQ? added 543 characters in body |
