I want to simulate demand values that follows different distributions (ex above: starts of linear> exponential>invlog>etc) I'm a bit confused by the notion of probability distributions but thought I could use rnorm, rexp, rlogis, etc. Is there any way I could do so?
I think it may be this but in R: Generating smoothed randoms that follow a distribution
Simulating random values from commonly-used probability distributions in R is fairly trivial using rnorm(), rexp(), etc, if you know what distribution you want to use, as well as its parameters. For example, rnorm(10, mean=5, sd=2) returns 10 draws from a normal distribution with mean 5 and sd 2.
rnorm(10, mean = 5, sd = 2)
## [1] 5.373151 7.970897 6.933788 5.455081 6.346129 5.767204 3.847219 7.477896 5.860069 6.154341
## or here's a histogram of 10000 draws...
hist(rnorm(10000, 5, 2))
You might be interested in an exponential distribution - check out hist(rexp(10000, rate=1)) to get the idea.
The easiest solution will be to investigate what probability distribution(s) you're interested in and their implementation in R.
It is still possible to return random draws from some custom function, and there are a few techniques out there for doing it - but it might get messy. Here's a VERY rough implementation of drawing randomly from probabilities defined by the region of x^3 - 3x^2 + 4 between zero and 3.
## first a vector of random uniform draws from the region
unifdraws <- runif(10000, 0, 3)
## assign a probability of "keeping" draws based on scaled probability
pkeep <- (unifdraws^3 - 3*unifdraws^2 + 4)/4
## randomly keep observations based on this probability
keep <- rbinom(10000, size=1, p=pkeep)
draws <- unifdraws[keep==1]
## and there it is!
hist(draws)
## of course, it's less than 10000 now, because we rejected some
length(draws)
## [1] 4364
Related
Im new to statictics and received below question that need to be answered in R language:
Simulate an i.i.d process {Xt}t=1,···,n following standard normal Xt ∼ Normal(0,1) with
sample size n = 1000 and simulation time N = 500. Compute the sample mean ̄X(1),··· , ̄X(N),
where ̄X(i) is the sample mean from the i-th simulation. Plot the histogram for ̄X(1),··· , ̄X(N).
my thought is:
as sample size n=1000, then I should
set.seed(1) # Setting a seed
X1 <- rnorm(1000) # Simulating X1
to compute the sample mean of X1-XN
result.mean <- mean(x1)
plot the histogram for mean X1-XN
plot(result.mean, type = 'h')
However I'm not sure what to do with the simulation time N = 500? the plot i generated is just 1 bar histogram, so I'm pretty sure the simulation time should be used.
what is the purpose of simulation here? and if my thought correct in the case of iid? thank you
Using randomized numbers from a normal distribution, the base (stats) r code is rnorm, with default values having a mean of 0 and standard deviation of 1. We get 500 samples from this. Then, take the mean of a vector of those 1000 numbers. We repeat that with replicate 1000 times and throw the result into a histogram.
hist(replicate(500, mean(rnorm(1000)), simplify = "vector"))
I want to plot the posterior distribution for data sampled from gamma(2,3) with a prior distribution of gamma(3,3). I am assuming alpha=2 is known. But a graph of my posterior for different values of the rate parameter centers around 4. It should be 3. I even tried with a uniform prior to make things simpler. Can you please spot what's wrong? Thank you.
set.seed(101)
dat <- rgamma(100,shape=2,rate=3)
alpha <- 3
n <- 100
post <- function(beta_1) {
posterior<- (((beta_1^alpha)^n)/gamma(alpha)^n)*
prod(dat^(alpha-1))*exp(-beta_1*sum(dat))
return(posterior)
}
vlogl <- Vectorize(post)
curve(vlogl2,from=2,to=6)
A tricky question and possibly more related to statistics than to programming =). I initially made the same reasoning mistake as you, but subsequently realised to be more careful with the posterior and the roles of alpha and beta_1.
The prior is uniform (or flat) so the posterior distribution is proportional (not equal) to the likelihood.
The quantity you have assigned to the posterior is indeed the likelihood. Plugging in alpha=3, this evaluates to
(prod(dat^2)/(gamma(alpha)^n)) * beta_1^(3*n)*exp(-beta_1*sum(dat)).
This is the crucial step. The last two terms in the product depend on beta_1 only, so these two parts determine the shape of the posterior. The posterior distribution is thus gamma distributed with shape parameter 3*n+1 and rate parameter sum(dat). As the mode of the gamma distribution is the ratio of these two and sum(dat) is about 66 for this seed, we get a mode of 301/66 (about 4.55). This coincides perfectly with the ``posterior plot'' (again you plotted the likelihood which is not properly scaled, i.e. not properly integrating to 1) produced by your code (attached below).
I hope LifeisBetter now =).
But a graph of my posterior for different values of the rate parameter
centers around 4. It should be 3.
The mean of your data is 0.659 (~2/3). Given a gamma distribution with a shape parameter alpha = 3, we are trying to find likely values of the rate parameter, beta, that gave rise to the observed data (subject to our prior information). The mean of a gamma distribution is the shape parameter divided by the rate parameter. 100 observations should be enough to mostly overcome the somewhat informative prior (which had a mean of 1), so we should expect beta to take values somewhere in the region alpha/mean(dat), not 3.
alpha/mean(dat)
#> [1] 4.54915
I'm not going to show the derivation of the posterior distribution for beta without TeX, but it is a gamma distribution that includes the rate parameter from the prior distribution of beta (betaPrior = 3):
set.seed(101)
n <- 100
dat <- rgamma(n, 2, 3)
alpha <- 3
betaPrior <- 3
post <- function(x) dgamma(x, alpha*(n + 1), sum(dat) + betaPrior)
curve(post, 2, 6)
Notice that the mean of beta is at ~4.39 rather than ~4.55 because of the informative prior that had a mean of 1.
I have data with 10000 instances, which resemble negative binomial distribution. I am sampling out of this data, but I need a subsample which is normally distributed and has a pre-specified mean. How can I achieve this?
library(MASS)
my_trees <- rnegbin(10000, mu = 15, theta = 3)
hist(my_trees)
mean(my_trees)
my_sample <- sample(my_trees, size = 500)
hist(my_sample)
mean(my_sample)
How can I sample data which will be normally distributed with a mean of, e.g. 25? I am aware of prob argument, and also read this related question, but anyhow I can not get what I want.
Normal distribution have two parameters ; location parameter and scale parameter.
You mentioned only mean (25) then you can generate n random values distributed from normal distribution with rnorm(n, mean = 25). For different sd(scale parameter), use rnorm(n, mean, sd). In the same way you generate my_trees with rnegbin, rnorm does the same job.
https://www.stat.umn.edu/geyer/old/5101/rlook.html provides information about several other distributions.
I can generate numbers with uniform distribution by using the code below:
runif(1,min=10,max=20)
How can I sample randomly generated numbers that fall more frequently closer to the minimum and maxium boundaries? (Aka an "upside down bell curve")
Well, bell curve is usually gaussian, meaning it doesn't have min and max. You could try Beta distribution and map it to desired interval. Along the lines
min <- 1
max <- 20
q <- min + (max-min)*rbeta(10000, 0.5, 0.5)
As #Gregor-reinstateMonica noted, Beta distribution is bounded on both ends, [0...1], so it could be easily mapped into any bounded interval just by scale and shift. It has two parameters, and symmetric if those parameters are equal. Above 1 parameters make it kind of bell distribution, but below 1 parameters make it into inverse bell, what you're looking for. You could play with them, put different values instead of 0.5 and see how it is going. Parameters equal to 1 makes it uniform.
Sampling from a beta distribution is a good idea. Another way is to sample a number of uniform numbers and then take the minimum or maximum of them.
According to the theory of order statistics, the cumulative distribution function for the maximum is F(x)^n where F is the cdf from which the sample is taken and n is the number of samples, and the cdf for the minimum is 1 - (1 - F(x))^n. For a uniform distribution, the cdf is a straight line from 0 to 1, i.e., F(x) = x, and therefore the cdf of the maximum is x^n and the cdf of the minimum is 1 - (1 - x)^n. As n increases, these become more and more curved, with most of the mass close to the ends.
A web search for "order statistics" will turn up some resources.
If you don't care about decimal places, a hacky way would be to generate a large sample of normally distributed datapoints using rnorm(), then count the number of times each given rounded value appears (n), and then substract n from the maximum value of n (max(n)) to get inverse counts.
You can then use the inverse count to make a new vector (that you can sample from), i.e.:
library(tidyverse)
x <- rnorm(100000, 100, 15)
x_tib <- round(x) %>%
tibble(x = .) %>%
count(x) %>%
mutate(new_n = max(n) - n)
new_x <- rep(x_tib$x, x_tib$new_n)
qplot(new_x, binwidth = 1)
An "upside-down bell curve" compared to the normal distribution can be sampled using the following algorithm. I write it in pseudocode because I'm not familiar with R. Notice that this sampler samples in a truncated interval (here, the interval [x0, x1]) because it's not possible for an upside-down bell curve extended to infinity to integrate to 1 (which is one of the requirements for a probability density).
In the pseudocode, RNDU01() is a uniform(0, 1) random number.
x0pdf = 1-exp(-(x0*x0))
x1pdf = 1-exp(-(x1*x1))
ymax = max(x0pdf, x1pdf)
while true
# Choose a random x-coordinate
x=RNDU01()*(x1-x0)+x0
# Choose a random y-coordinate
y=RNDU01()*ymax
# Return x if y falls within PDF
if y < 1-exp(-(x*x)): return x
end
Trying to fit a chi_square distribution using fitdistr() in R. Documentation on this is here (and not very useful to me): https://stat.ethz.ch/R-manual/R-devel/library/MASS/html/fitdistr.html
Question 1: chi_df below has the following output: 3.85546875 (0.07695236). What is the second number? The Variance or standard deviation?
Question 2: fitdistr generates 'k' defined by the Chi-SQ distribution. How do I fit the data so I get the scaling constant 'A'? I am dumbly using lines 14-17 below. Obviously not good.
Question 3: Is the Chi-SQ distribution only defined for a certain x-range? (Variance is defined as 2K, while mean = k. This must require some constrained x-range... Stats question not programming...)
nnn = 1000;
## Generating a chi-sq distribution
chii <- rchisq(nnn,4, ncp = 0);
## Plotting Histogram
chi_hist <- hist(chii);
## Fitting. Gives probability density which must be scaled.
chi_df <- fitdistr(chii,"chi-squared",start=list(df=3));
chi_k <- chi_df[[1]][1];
## Plotting a fitted line:
## Spanning x-length of chi-sq data
x_chi_fit <- 1:nnn*((max(chi_hist[[1]][])-min(chi_hist[[1]][]))/nnn);
## Y data using eqn for probability function
y_chi_fit <- (1/(2^(chi_k/2)*gamma(chi_k/2)) * x_chi_fit^(chi_k/2-1) * exp(-x_chi_fit/2));
## Normalizing to the peak of the histogram
y_chi_fit <- y_chi_fit*(max(chi_hist[[2]][]/max(y_chi_fit)));
## Plotting the line
lines(x_chi_fit,y_chi_fit,lwd=2,col="green");
Thanks for your help!
As commented above, ?fitdistr says
An object of class ‘"fitdistr"’, a list with four components,
...
sd: the estimated standard errors,
... so that parenthesized number is the standard error of the parameter.
The scale parameter doesn't need to be estimated; you need either to scale by the width of your histogram bins or just use freq=FALSE when drawing your histogram. See code below.
The chi-squared distribution is defined on the non-negative reals, which makes sense since it's the distribution of a squared standard Normal (this is a statistical, not a programming question).
Set up data:
nnn <- 1000
## ensure reproducibility; not a big deal in this case,
## but good practice
set.seed(101)
## Generating a chi-sq distribution
chii <- rchisq(nnn,4, ncp = 0)
Fitting.
library(MASS)
## use method="Brent" based on warning
chi_df <- fitdistr(chii,"chi-squared",start=list(df=3),
method="Brent",lower=0.1,upper=100)
chi_k <- chi_df[[1]][1]
(For what it's worth, it looks like there might be a bug in the print method for fitdistr when method="Brent" is used. You could also use method="BFGS" and wouldn't need to specify bounds ...)
Histograms
chi_hist <- hist(chii,breaks=50,col="gray")
## scale by N and width of histogram bins
curve(dchisq(x,df=chi_k)*nnn*diff(chi_hist$breaks)[1],
add=TRUE,col="green")
## or plot histogram already scaled to a density
chi_hist <- hist(chii,breaks=50,col="gray",freq=FALSE)
curve(dchisq(x,df=chi_k),add=TRUE,col="green")