Tell me more ×
Cross Validated is a question and answer site for statisticians, data analysts, data miners and data visualization experts. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Lots of distributions have "origin myths", or examples of physical processes that they describe well:

  • You can get normally distributed data from sums of uncorrelated errors via the Central Limit Theorem
  • You can get binomially distributed data from independent coin flips, or Poisson-distributed variables from a limit of that process
  • You can get exponentially distributed data from waiting times under a constant decay rate.

And so on.

But what about the Laplace distribution? It's useful for L1 regularization and LAD regression, but it's hard for me to think of a situation where one should actually expect to see it in nature. Diffusion would be Gaussian, and all the examples I can think of with exponential distributions (e.g. waiting times) involve non-negative values.

Thanks in advance for your thoughts.

share|improve this question

1 Answer

up vote 10 down vote accepted

At the bottom of the Wikipedia page you linked are a few examples:

  • If $X_1$ and $X_2$ are IID exponential distributions, $X_1 - X_2$ has a Laplace distribution.

  • If $X_1, X_2, X_3, X_4$ are IID standard normal distributions, $X_1X_4 - X_2X_3$ has a standard Laplace distribution. So, the determinant of a random $2\times 2$ matrix with IID standard normal entries $\begin{pmatrix}X_1 & X_2 \\\ X_3 & X_4 \end{pmatrix} $ has a Laplace distribution.

  • If $X_1, X_2$ are IID uniform on $[0,1]$, then $\log \frac{X_1}{X_2}$ has a standard Laplace distribution.

share|improve this answer
9  
+1 It may be worth noticing that all three examples are really the same: #2 can be rewritten as $((X_1+X_4)^2 + (X_2+X_3)^2 - [(X_1-X_4)^2 + (X_2-X_3)^2])/4$, a scaled difference of two scaled $\chi^2(2)$ (Exponential) distributions, and #3 is the difference of two Exponential distributions because the $\log(X_i)$ are Exponential. – whuber Sep 24 '12 at 20:59
2  
@whuber: Thanks for that explanation for why the determinant was the same as the others! I was surprised to see it, since I would have guessed that the density of the determinant would vary smoothly, as it does everywhere except $0$. – Douglas Zare Sep 24 '12 at 21:03
@DouglasZare @whuber; thanks! – David J. Harris Sep 24 '12 at 21:24

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.