2
$\begingroup$

The simplest version of the issue that I am looking for help is:

How to detect the correct distribution from a small sample size in R by using fitdistrplus

A simpler version:

I am generating some random numbers with Gamma distribution and fitting these random numbers to different distributions (Lognormal, Weibull, Exp, Gamma), but unfortunately the AIC obtained from Gamma is not always the minimum AIC, I appreciate if someone could help me to find an approach to detect Gamma after fitting even for a small sample size.

Longer version:

I am generating some random numbers with Gamma distribution. In order to do that I need three parameters:Number of random numbers, shape and scale. I am using pre-calculated shape and scale and for the number of random numbers, this varies from 40 to 120. I know that if shape gets close to 1 it is difficult to distinguish exp, gamma and weibull as stated here, so I am trying to keep shape far away from 1. Sample size is another matter and if I increase my sample size the results will be much better, but I have to keep my sample size small. I am trying to detect Gamma after fitting with a high accuracy but seems it is not possible. I am thinking of changing the method from mle to qme or something else but not sure which one I shall go for. I have tried a few of them but no success as I am not a statistician. Another issue is that I considered not only the lowest AIC to detect the best-fitted distribution, but also by using some other parameters such as std error of the fitting, but no success. I appreciate any help especially in simple terms:). Please let me know if you need more information.

So this is my code in R:

    library(fitdistrplus)
    require(distr)

    shapegoriginal=0.769230769230769
    scalegoriginal=78
    numberofrandomnumbers=60
    numbeoftrial=100
    counter_AIC_fitw=0;
    counter_AIC_fitl=0;
    counter_AIC_fitgamma=0;
    counter_AIC_fite=0;
    out <- matrix(NA, nrow=numbeoftrial, ncol=13)
    for(i in 1:numbeoftrial)
    {

        nn=(rgamma(numberofrandomnumbers, shape = shapegoriginal, scale = scalegoriginal))
        fite=fitdist (nn ,'exp')
        lambda=fite[1]$estimate[1]

        fitl=fitdist (nn ,'lnorm')
        meanl=fitl[1]$estimate[1] 
    	sdl=fitl[1]$estimate[2]   

        fitw=fitdist (nn  ,'weibull')
        shape=fitw[1]$estimate[1] 
    	scale=fitw[1]$estimate[2]

        fitgamma=fitdist (nn ,'gamma')
        shapeg=fitgamma[1]$estimate[1] 
    	scaleg=1/fitgamma[1]$estimate[2]

        AIC_fitw=summary(fitw)$aic
       	AIC_fitl=summary(fitl)$aic
        AIC_fitgamma=summary(fitgamma)$aic
       	AIC_fite=summary(fite)$aic

        min_AIC=min(AIC_fitw,AIC_fitl,AIC_fitgamma,AIC_fite)

        if(min_AIC==AIC_fitw){counter_AIC_fitw=counter_AIC_fitw+1 }
        if(min_AIC==AIC_fitl){counter_AIC_fitl=counter_AIC_fitl+1}
        if(min_AIC==AIC_fitgamma){counter_AIC_fitgamma=counter_AIC_fitgamma+1}
        if(min_AIC==AIC_fite){counter_AIC_fite=counter_AIC_fite+1}
            out[i,]=c(i,lambda,meanl,sdl,shape,scale,shapeg,scaleg,AIC_fitw,AIC_fitl,AIC_fitgamma,AIC_fite,min_AIC)

    }
    print('#when Weibull detected')
    print(counter_AIC_fitw)
    print('#when Lognormal detected')
    print(counter_AIC_fitl)
    print('#when Gamma detected')
    print(counter_AIC_fitgamma)
    print('#when Exp detected')
    print(counter_AIC_fite)
    colnames(out)=c('i','lambda','meanl','sdl','shape','scale','shapeg','scaleg','AIC_fitw','AIC_fitl','AIC_fitgamma','AIC_fite','min_AIC')
out

A short explanation:

The reason for having this approach with this small sample size is as follows: I have some devices which only detects a small portion of passing objects and I am trying to find out which distribution the inter-arrival of these objects have. So, instead of fitting these inter-arrival times to fitdist, I am investigating the accuracy of this approach. My sample size is about 40 to 120 per hour. Shape and scale are calculated based on the typical mean and sd of these inter-arrivals per hour

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Any idea?what about if I check the density of these distributions based on the parameters(shape,scale,mean,..) which I get from fitdist? $\endgroup$ – mohsen hs Feb 10 '17 at 20:04

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.