The S‐Distribution A Tool for Approximation and Classification of Univariate, Unimodal Probability Distributions

In many statistical applications a data set needs to be evaluated but there is no solid information about which probability distribution might be most appropriate. Typical solutions to this problems are: to make assumptions that facilitate mathematical treatment; to use a family of distribution functions that contains all relevant distributions as special cases; or, to employ nonparametric methods. All three solutions have disadvantages since assumptions are usually difficult to justify, families of distributions contain too many parameters to be of practical use, and nonparametric methods make it difficult to characterize data in a succinct quantitative form. The S-distribution introduced here is a compromise between the conflicting goals of simplicity in analysis and generality in scope. It is characterized by four parameters, one of which reflects its location, the second one its spread, and the remaining two its shape; transformation to a standard form reduces the number of free parameters to two. Cumulatives and densities are computed numerically in fractions of seconds, key features like quantiles and moments are easily obtained, and results can be presented in terms of parameter values. The S-distribution rather accurately models different distribution functions, including central and noncentral distributions, and thus competes in flexibility with some distribution families. As an approximation, the S-distribution provides a graphical method for demonstrating relationships between distributions, such as the relationships between central F, χ2 and χ−2 or central and noncentral t, χ-1, and normal.

[1]  M. Savageau Biochemical systems analysis. II. The steady-state solutions for an n-pool system using a power-law approximation. , 1969, Journal of theoretical biology.

[2]  E. Voit,et al.  Recasting nonlinear differential equations as S-systems: a canonical nonlinear form , 1987 .

[3]  Eberhard O. Voit,et al.  Power-Low Approach to Modelng Biological Systems : III. Methods of Analysis , 1982 .

[4]  Herbert Heyer Theory of statistical experiments , 1982 .

[5]  K. Matusita Decision Rules, Based on the Distance, for Problems of Fit, Two Samples, and Estimation , 1955 .

[6]  M. A. Savageau,et al.  A Suprasystem of Probability Distributions , 1982 .

[7]  Eberhard O. Voit,et al.  Canonical nonlinear modeling : S-system approach to understanding complexity , 1991 .

[8]  Eberhard O. Voit,et al.  Analytical Solutions to a Generalized Growth Equation , 1984 .

[9]  M A Savageau Allometric morphogenesis of complex systems: Derivation of the basic equations from first principles. , 1979, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[10]  R. Beran Minimum Hellinger distance estimates for parametric models , 1977 .

[11]  A. Bertuzzi,et al.  Mathematical models of the cell cycle with a view to tumor studies. , 1981, Mathematical biosciences.

[12]  D. Prescott,et al.  Variations in the individual generation times of Tetrahymena geleii HS. , 1959, Experimental cell research.

[13]  K. Pearson Contributions to the Mathematical Theory of Evolution. II. Skew Variation in Homogeneous Material , 1895 .

[14]  M A Savageau,et al.  Accuracy of alternative representations for integrated biochemical systems. , 1987, Biochemistry.

[15]  J. Wolfowitz,et al.  Introduction to the Theory of Statistics. , 1951 .

[16]  M. Savageau Biochemical Systems Analysis: A Study of Function and Design in Molecular Biology , 1976 .

[17]  M A Savageau,et al.  Growth of complex systems can be related to the properties of their underlying determinants. , 1979, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.