4.4 Article

The unit log-log distribution: a new unit distribution with alternative quantile regression modeling and educational measurements applications

期刊

JOURNAL OF APPLIED STATISTICS
卷 50, 期 4, 页码 889-908

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/02664763.2021.2001442

关键词

Educational measurements; log-log model; Pham distribution; quantile regression; unit data modeling; unit log-log distribution

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A new distribution, called the unit log-log distribution, is proposed in this paper, and its basic properties as well as parameter estimation methods are studied. Through applications on real data sets and Monte Carlo simulation studies, it is demonstrated that the proposed models have better modeling abilities.
In this paper, we propose a new distribution, named unit log-log distribution, defined on the bounded (0,1) interval. Basic distributional properties such as model shapes, stochastic ordering, quantile function, moments, and order statistics of the newly defined unit distribution are studied. The maximum likelihood estimation method has been pointed out to estimate its model parameters. The new quantile regression model based on the proposed distribution is introduced and it has been derived estimations of its model parameters also. The Monte Carlo simulation studies have been given to see the performance of the estimation method based on the new unit distribution and its regression modeling. Applications of the newly defined distribution and its quantile regression model to real data sets show that the proposed models have better modeling abilities than competitive models. The proposed unit quantile regression model has targeted to explain linear relation between educational measurements of both OECD (Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development) countries and some non-members of OECD countries, and their Better Life Index. The existence of the significant covariates has been seen on the real data applications for the unit median response.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据