Timeline for Why in Box-Cox method we try to make x and y normally distributed, but that's not an assumption for linear regression?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
7 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 4, 2019 at 6:35 | vote | accept | Andre | ||
| May 7, 2018 at 9:29 | history | edited | kjetil b halvorsen♦ | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 874 characters in body
|
| Oct 27, 2017 at 19:50 | comment | added | AdamO | Constant variance is not an assumption if you use sandwich based standard errors. | |
| Oct 27, 2017 at 15:30 | history | edited | kjetil b halvorsen♦ | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 2 characters in body
|
| Oct 26, 2017 at 15:52 | comment | added | kjetil b halvorsen♦ | I will extend this answer when I hava a little time | |
| Oct 26, 2017 at 14:42 | comment | added | whuber♦ | Since the question really comes down to distinguishing the "Box Cox Method" of the quotation from the far more general Box-Cox transformation, it would help to make that distinction clearly rather than conflating the two. | |
| Oct 26, 2017 at 11:00 | history | answered | kjetil b halvorsen♦ | CC BY-SA 3.0 |