Skip to main content
. 2019 Dec 20;14:6. doi: 10.1186/s13029-019-0076-2

Table 2.

Computed parameters and their accuracy

Value from Value from Elderton Absolute Differenceb Relative Differencec
Typea Parameter SAS/IML Macro and Johnson (1969)
I β1 .507296 .507296 <.0001 <.01%
β2 2.935111 2.935110 <.0001 <.01%
κ -.264690 -.264500 .0002 .07%
r 5.186821 5.186811 <.0001 <.01%
α1 1.977543 1.996380 .0188 .94%
α2 13.508428 13.527280 .0189 .14%
m1 .406954 .409833 .0029 .70%
m1 2.779867 2.776878 .0030 .12%
IV β1 .005366 .005366 <.0001 <.01%
β2 3.172912 3.172912 <.0001 <.01%
κ .012230 .012800 .0006 4.46%
r 39.442562 39.442540 <.0001 <.01%
v 4.388796 4.388794 <.0001 <.01%
α 13.111988 13.111980 <.0001 <.01%
m 20.721280 20.721270 <.0001 <.01%
VI β1 .995360 .995361 <.0001 <.01%
β2 4.739349 4.739349 <.0001 <.01%
κ 1.894437 1.895000 .0006 .03%
r -33.421430 -33.421290 .0001 <.01%
q1 42.030520 42.030800 .0003 <.01%
q2 6.609095 6.609500 .0004 <.01%
α 10.379832 10.379470 .0004 <.01%

aElderton and Johnson (1969) does not have the other types of Pearson distributions

bAbsolute Difference = |Value from Elderton and Johnson (1969) − Value from SAS/IML Macro |

cRelative Difference = |(Value from Elderton and Johnson (1969) − Value from SAS/IML Macro)/Value from Elderton and Johnson (1969) |×100%