great ... yes that is easier than putting in the density function manually !! I still use Excel 2007 at home and 2003 at work !!! Yikes. will look for that in the 2010 version. Thanks for your help.
Dave, how do you draw the beta probability density function? Excel has BETADIST, but this only draws a cumulative probability distribution ... was wondering how you managed to construct these? Thanks.
@wooddog007 I can't recall, i may have manually input the formula/function or approximated with the cumulative CDF (by subtracting, you can get near). But, no matter: in EXCEL 2010, betadist() has been upgraded to beta.dist() which adds a paramater (true = CDF, false = pdf), so you might just upgrade to 2010? thanks, David
if you let your beta distribution have parameters less than or equal to 1 for both of them, then your distribution will be bimodal with peaks at 0 and at 1, which sounds like it might be a more realistic model.
Sorry, I do not understand this economic context as I my field is in biostatistics, but it sounds to me like the choice of a Beta distribution is somewhat arbitrary, so a looser yet more complicated model (like a mixture of two betas) could also solve your problems.
great ... yes that is easier than putting in the density function manually !! I still use Excel 2007 at home and 2003 at work !!! Yikes. will look for that in the 2010 version. Thanks for your help.
wooddog007 11 months ago
Dave, how do you draw the beta probability density function? Excel has BETADIST, but this only draws a cumulative probability distribution ... was wondering how you managed to construct these? Thanks.
wooddog007 11 months ago
@wooddog007 I can't recall, i may have manually input the formula/function or approximated with the cumulative CDF (by subtracting, you can get near). But, no matter: in EXCEL 2010, betadist() has been upgraded to beta.dist() which adds a paramater (true = CDF, false = pdf), so you might just upgrade to 2010? thanks, David
bionicturtledotcom 11 months ago
if you let your beta distribution have parameters less than or equal to 1 for both of them, then your distribution will be bimodal with peaks at 0 and at 1, which sounds like it might be a more realistic model.
Sorry, I do not understand this economic context as I my field is in biostatistics, but it sounds to me like the choice of a Beta distribution is somewhat arbitrary, so a looser yet more complicated model (like a mixture of two betas) could also solve your problems.
ianjamesbarnett 1 year ago
Comment removed
khanpreston1 1 year ago