Content deleted Content added
Line 73:
::Sorry, I haven't been around for a few days. So can I check, {{u|Trovatore}}, do you feel that our original concern (that this term is a mistake) is actually wrong, and the fact that it's been used by so many people means we have to regard it as a valid name for the function, unless we can find a couple of reliable people saying specifically that it's an error? If so, {{u|Michael Hardy}}, do you know of a source that says so? I appreciate this can be very difficult; it's often hard to find a source that says something that most people in a field believe is obvious. [[User:Elemimele|Elemimele]] ([[User talk:Elemimele|talk]]) 06:01, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
::: I'm not willing to say the term is a mistake or that it's not a mistake. I agree with Michael that it's an unfortunate term. But if I squint I can see a colorable case for it, and I think that anyone claiming ''actively'' that it's an error has the burden of proof. --[[User:Trovatore|Trovatore]] ([[User talk:Trovatore|talk]]) 06:04, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
{{ping|Trovatore}} Two points:
* You ask what you get when you accumulate a density function. There are such things as mass density, energy density, probability density, and some others. When you accumulated a mass density function you get a mass; when you accumulate an energy density function you get energy; when you accumulate a probability density function you get a probability. The values of cumulative distribution functions are probabilities.
* You say clearing up confusions is not our job. I wonder why not. Wikipedia is supposed to provide information. That includes clearing up confusions.
[[User:Michael Hardy|Michael Hardy]] ([[User talk:Michael Hardy|talk]]) 02:43, 16 July 2023 (UTC)
| |||