MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386832561 · doi:10.28924/2291-8639-21-2023-97

A Three Parameter Power Nakagami Distribution: Properties and Application on the Tax Revenue Data

2023· article· en· W4386832561 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Shakila Bashir, Noor Waseem, M. Serajur Rasul

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Analysis and Applications · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Distribution Estimation and Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematicsProbability density functionLorenz curveCumulative distribution functionNakagami distributionStatisticsLog-logistic distributionMoment-generating functionEconometricsProbability distributionApplied mathematicsGini coefficientMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Developing the probability distributions is increasing extensively over the decades but even though the newly developed distributions have elegant properties and variety of shapes which are applicable in wide areas of real-life situations and a numerous type of data sets. In this article, we introduced a three-parameter positively skewed model named Power Nakagami (PN) distribution based on power transformation. Various statistical properties of the Power Nakagami distribution are derived, including moments. Some reliability measures such as survival function, hazard function, cumulative hazard function and reversed hazard function are discussed also expressions for mills ratio, odd function, elasticity and Lorenz and Bonferroni Curve are developed. Graphical representation of probability density function, cumulative density function and reliability measures are presented. Maximum likelihood estimation is used to estimate the parameters. The distribution is fitted to real life dataset (Tax revenue) to demonstrate the comparison of the new distribution with the base distribution.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.967
Threshold uncertainty score0.289

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.115
GPT teacher head0.371
Teacher spread0.256 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Analysis and ApplicationsSame topicStatistical Distribution Estimation and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207