Talk:Statistics/Normal distribution: Difference between revisions
Content added Content deleted
(Dupe with extra work) |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
[[Random numbers]] turns a uniform distribution into a normal one, but it doesn't have all the crazy extra stats. This seems like a duplicate. I think the extra work is just noise to prove the formula, but it's already been proven, so it's not really necessary. --[[User:Mwn3d|Mwn3d]] 01:33, 27 July 2011 (UTC) |
[[Random numbers]] turns a uniform distribution into a normal one, but it doesn't have all the crazy extra stats. This seems like a duplicate. I think the extra work is just noise to prove the formula, but it's already been proven, so it's not really necessary. --[[User:Mwn3d|Mwn3d]] 01:33, 27 July 2011 (UTC) |
||
: I know. There's a whole school of techniques to produce different distributions from a uniform one, I was thinking about how to organize them into a topic, and normal dist seemed to be the most obvious one. It's difficult to keep it both simple and useful. Maybe should scrap it for now, I'll work with the sandbox first. --[[User:Ledrug|Ledrug]] 02:44, 27 July 2011 (UTC) |
|||
Revision as of 02:44, 27 July 2011
Dupe with extra work
Random numbers turns a uniform distribution into a normal one, but it doesn't have all the crazy extra stats. This seems like a duplicate. I think the extra work is just noise to prove the formula, but it's already been proven, so it's not really necessary. --Mwn3d 01:33, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
- I know. There's a whole school of techniques to produce different distributions from a uniform one, I was thinking about how to organize them into a topic, and normal dist seemed to be the most obvious one. It's difficult to keep it both simple and useful. Maybe should scrap it for now, I'll work with the sandbox first. --Ledrug 02:44, 27 July 2011 (UTC)