• No se han encontrado resultados

Comparación (semejanzas y diferencias) entre la EIRL y la sociedad unipersonal

4. La unipersonalidad societaria en la legislación peruana

4.4 Comparación (semejanzas y diferencias) entre la EIRL y la sociedad unipersonal

As a ’center’ of the distribution we find ([1]) the John- son mean x∗: S(x) = 0 and as a measure of variability

of values around x∗the Johnson variance, we introduce

an analogy of (2),

ω2= ES

2

(ES0)2. (4)

For distributions with Johnson parameter, (4) is equal to the suggestion given in [1], for other distributions, (4) is better.

Densities, Johnson scores, Johnson means and Johnson variances of distributions presented below as examples are given for reference in Table 1. Apart from the normal distribution, the support of all other distributions in Table 1 is X = (0, ∞). Distribution f (x) S(x) x∗ ω2 normal 1 2πσe 12(x−µσ )2 x−µ σ2 µ σ2 lognormal √β 2πxe 1 2log 2(xt)β β t log(x/t) β t t22 Weibull βx(x t) βe−(x t)β β t[(x/t) β− 1] t t22 gamma xΓ (α)γα e−γx γ( x α/γ− 1) α/γ α/γ 2 inv. gamma xΓ (α)γα x−αe−γ/x α(1 −γ/α x ) γ/α γ 23 beta-prime xB(p,q)1 (x+1)xpp+q q p qx−p x+1 p/q p(p+q)2 q3(p+q+1)

Table 1. Some distributions and their characteristics.

Fig.1 shows densities and Johnson scores of three inverse gamma distributions with γ = α = 0.6(1), 1 and 1.5(3). The densities are heavy-tailed so that extremely large values can be observed. Johnson scores are bounded in infinity, so that averages of S(xi) are

not sensitive to large xi (on the other hand, it

is apparent from the figure that the averages of S(xi)

can be heavily influenced by xi near zero). The mean

of distribution 1 and 2 do not exist, the mean of distri- bution 3 is denoted by the star. All three distributions have the same Johnson mean x∗= 1, which seems to

give a reasonable description of the position of a dis- tribution on the x-axis.

Unlike the usual moments, the sample versions of the Johnson score moments cannot be deter- mined without an assumption about the underlying distribution family. On the other hand, by substitut- ing the empirical distribution function into (3), the resulting system of equations,

0 1 4 0 1 0 1 4 −4 0 2 1 3 3 1

Fig. 1. Densities and Johnson scores of inverse gamma dis- tributions. 1 n n X i=1 Sk(xi; θ) = ESk(θ), k = 1, ..., m (5)

appears to be an alternative to system (1). The esti- mates ˆθn from (5) are M-estimates so that they are

for large n approximately normally distributed with mean θ0 and variance given by expression similar

to (2). The variances are slightly larger than that of the maximum likelihood estimates, but the estimates are robust in cases of heavy tailed distributions.

Generally, Johnson mean x∗ = x

1, ..., θm). If

θj = const. for j = 2, ..., m so that x∗ = x∗(θ1) or

if x∗ = ϕ(θ

21) and θj = const. for j = 3, ..., m, the

first equation of system (5) can be written in the form

n

X

i=1

S(xi; x∗) = 0, (6)

where x∗ plays the role of a parameter. For example,

in case of the beta-prime distribution,

S(x; p, q) = q p qx − p xi+ 1 = q2 p x − x∗ x + 1 (7)

so that (6) has a form

n X i=1 xi− x∗ xi+ 1 = 0. (8)

Let us call the estimate ˆx∗

n of x∗a sample Johnson

mean. Since ˆx∗

nis an M-estimate, we have immediately

the following result:

Theorem 1. The sample Johnson mean ˆx∗ n deter-

mined from (6) is approximately distributed by N (x∗, ω2/n) where ω2 is given by (4).

Geometry in data space 45

3

Johnson distance

Definition 1 Let S be Johnson score of distribution F with support X ⊆ R. A Johnson difference of x1, x2∈ X

from distribution F is

d(x1, x2) = S(x2) − S(x1). (9)

If the Johnson score is written as S(x; x∗),

d(x1, x2) = S(x2; x∗) − S(x1; x∗). In what follows,

S0(x; x) means (dS(x; x)/dx)|

x=x∗. We approach to

the main result of this paper.

Theorem 2. Let ˆx∗ be the estimate of the Johnson

mean x∗ of distribution F from (6). Then d(ˆx n, x∗) is

approximately N (0, [S0(x; x)]2ω2/n).

Proof follows from Theorem 1 and so called invariance principle saying that if√n(ˆθ∗

n−θ) → N (0, σ2) as n → ∞

in distribution and φ is continuous, then

n(φ(ˆθ∗

n) − φ(θ∗)) → N (0, [φ0(θ∗)]2σ2)

as n → ∞ in distribution.

By Theorem 2, the approximate (100 − α)% con- fidence bounds for Johnson mean can be determined from condition D(ˆx∗n, x∗) = |d(ˆxn, x∗)| S0x n; ˆx∗nωn = |S(ˆx∗ n, x∗)| S0x n; ˆx∗nωn ≤ λn (10) where λn= uα/2/

n and uα/2is the (α/2)-th quantile

of the normal distribution (in (10), we used relation S(ˆx∗

n; ˆx∗n) = 0 and replaced ω by its estimate).

4

Examples

As an example of a procedure taking into account the geometry in the sample space of the given (assumed) distribution we determine the confidence intervals for Johnson mean of distributions from Table 1. We work with simplified formulas for Johnson scores without constant multiplicative terms, since they are cancelled in (10).

In case of the normal distribution, the first two Johnson moment equations (5) are identical with the maximum likelihood equations (1) so that ˆx∗

n= ¯x and

ˆ

ω2 = ˆσ2. For large n, the approximate (100 − α)%

confidence interval is, as usually, (¯x − λnσˆn, ¯x + λnσˆn)

(in this case we know, of course, the exact distribution of (x − ¯x)/ˆσ).

Sample Johnson mean of distributions with Johnson parameter t is ˆx∗

n = ˆtn and its asymptotic

variance ω2 = 1/ES2. In case of the lognormal dis-

tribution, S(x, t) = log(x/t), by (6) ˆtn = n1 n

P

i=1

log xi,

D(ˆtn, t) = |S(ˆtn, t)|/(1/t ∗ t/β) and the approximate

(100 − α)% Johnson confidence interval for x∗ is

(ˆtne−λn/β, ˆtneλn/β).

From the second eq. of (5), ˆβ2 n= n/

n

P

i=1

log2(xi/ˆtn). In

case of the Weibull distribution, S(x; t) = (x/t)β−1,

ˆtn = (n1

Pn i=1x

β

i)1/β, which is the β-th mean, and,

since D(ˆtn, t) = |S(ˆtn, t)|/(β/t ∗ t/β), the approximate

(100 − α)% Johnson confidence interval for x∗ is

(ˆtn(1 − λn)1/β, ˆtn(1 + λn)1/β).

Let us determine confidence intervals for distri- butions without Johnson parameter. In case of the gamma distribution, S(x, x∗) = γx − α so that ˆx

n =

α/γ = ¯x. From (10) we obtain D(¯x, x∗) =αˆ

n|x∗/¯x−1|

and the approximate (100 − α)% Johnson confidence intervals is

x − λnρn, ¯x + λnρn)

where ρ2

n = 1/ˆαn= 1n

Pn

i=1x2i/¯x2− 1 (it follows from

the second eq. of (5)). In a particular case α = 1, γ = 1/t (the exponential distribution), Johnson dis- tance is identical with the well-known Rao distance.

In case of the inverse gamma distribution, S(x, x∗) = α − γ/x so that the sample Johnson mean

ˆ x∗

n = γ/α = n/

Pn

i=11/xi = ¯xH is the harmonic

mean. Since S0(x; x) = α2/γ, ES2 = α,

E(−∂S(x; x∗)/∂x) = α2/γ and D(x, ¯x H) =

ˆ

αn|1 − ¯xH/x∗|, the approximate (100 − α)% John-

son confidence interval for x∗ is

µ ¯ xH 1 + λnρn, ¯ xH 1 − λnρn,

where, from the second equation of (5), ρ2

n= 1/ˆαn = ¯ x2 H/n1 Pn i=11/x2i − 1.

By (6), the sample Johnson mean of the beta-prime distribution is ˆ x∗ n = Pn i=11 + xxi i Pn i=11 + x1 i . (11) Since S(x; x∗)=(x−x)/(x+1), S0(x; x)=1/(p+q), ES2 = pq/(p + q + 1) and E(−∂S(x; x)/∂x) =

q2/(p + q), the approximate (100 − α)% Johnson con-

fidence interval for x∗ is

µ ˆ xn− λnρn 1 + λnρn ,xˆn+ λnρn 1 − λnρn,

46 Zdenˇek Fabi´an

where ρn= ˆωn/(ˆx∗n+ 1).

In Table 2 we present confidence intervals (c− n, c+n)

for Johnson mean of distributions from Table 1 with the values of parameters chosen such that all the dis- tributions have the same (assumed) values ˆx∗

n= 2 and ˆ ωn = 1. distribution c− n c+n Weibull 1.700 2.260 gamma 1.723 2.277 lognormal 1.741 2.297 beta-prime 1.746 2.305 inverse gamma 1.757 2.322

Table 2. Confidence intervals for n = 50 and α = 0.05.

With exception of the interval for gamma distrib- ution, all intervals are non-symmetric. Their lengths are similar, which is the consequence of equal Johnson variances of all distributions. The results of simula- tion experiments are in a good agreement with the predicted Johnson confidence intervals.

References

1. Fabi´an Z., Geometry of Probabilistic Models. Proc. ITAT 2006, 2006, 35–40

2. Fabi´an Z., New Measures of Central Tendency and Vari- ability of Continuous Distributions. To appear in Com- mun. in Statist., Theory Methods, 2, 2008

3. Fabi´an Z., Induced Cores and Their Use in Ro- bust Parametric Estimation. Commun. Statist., Theory Methods, 30, 3, 2001, 537–556

4. Johnson N.L., Kotz S., and Balakrishnan N., Continu- ous Univariate Distributions 1, 2. Wiley, 1994, 1995 5. Marrona A.R., Martin R.D., and Yohai V.J., Robust

On radio communication in grid networks