D.Hendriks (Dennis) wrote: > Alan G Isaac wrote: >> On Mon, 12 Nov 2007, "D.Hendriks (Dennis)" apparently wrote: >> >>> All of this makes me doubt the correctness of the formula >>> you proposed. >>> >> It is always a good idea to hesitate before doubting Robert. >> <URL:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weibull_distribution#Generating_Weibull-distributed_random_variates> >> >> hth, >> Alan Isaac >> > So, you are saying that it was indeed correct? That still leaves the > question why I can't seem to confirm that in the figure I mentioned (red > and green lines). Also, if you refer to X = lambda*(-ln(U))^(1/k) as > 'proof' for the validity of the formula, I have to ask if > Weibull(a,Size) does actually correspond to (-ln(U))^(1/a)? >
Have you actually looked at a histogram of the random variates generated this way to see if they are wrong? Multiplying the the individual random values by a number changes the distribution differently than multiplying the distribution/density function by a number. Ryan -- Ryan May Graduate Research Assistant School of Meteorology University of Oklahoma _______________________________________________ Numpy-discussion mailing list Numpy-discussion@scipy.org http://projects.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
