In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Robert Ehrlich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Apparently not; according to Evans, Hastings, and Peacock " the LaPlace provides >a heavier tailed alternative to the Gaussian." (Statistical Distributions, >Wiley)
I cannot see anyone making such a statement. There is no particular reason why data should follow any particular type of distribution in general, and this includes the normal. In particular cases, one might be able to justify a distribution such as the binomial or even the Laplace distribution on theoretical grounds, but I do not know of a "natural" model which will yield the normal, except as an approximation. >Chia C Chong wrote: >> Hello... >> I wonder, are there any mathematical relationship between the Gaussian & >> Laplacian PDF? How about the statistical explaination of these twoPDFs? I am >> very interested to know more on these 2 PDFs. I would be grateful if someone >> have ever come across any articles that discuss these would let me know the >> further details. >> Thanks. >> CCC -- This address is for information only. I do not claim that these views are those of the Statistics Department or of Purdue University. Herman Rubin, Dept. of Statistics, Purdue Univ., West Lafayette IN47907-1399 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Phone: (765)494-6054 FAX: (765)494-0558 . . ================================================================= Instructions for joining and leaving this list, remarks about the problem of INAPPROPRIATE MESSAGES, and archives are available at: . http://jse.stat.ncsu.edu/ . =================================================================
