Re: [Statistics] Convention when outside support?

> On 29 Nov 2019, at 18:24, Gilles Sadowski wrote: > > Hi. > > Le ven. 29 nov. 2019 à 18:41, Alex Herbert > a écrit : >> >> On 29/11/2019 16:48, Gilles Sadowski wrote: >>> Hello. >>> >>> For all implemented distributions, what convention should be adopted

Re: [Statistics] Convention when outside support?

Hi. Le ven. 29 nov. 2019 à 18:41, Alex Herbert a écrit : > > On 29/11/2019 16:48, Gilles Sadowski wrote: > > Hello. > > > > For all implemented distributions, what convention should be adopted > > when methods > > * density(x) > > * logDensity(x) > > * cumulativeProbability(x) > > are

Re: [Statistics] Convention when outside support?

On 29/11/2019 16:48, Gilles Sadowski wrote: Hello. For all implemented distributions, what convention should be adopted when methods * density(x) * logDensity(x) * cumulativeProbability(x) are called with "x" out of the "support" bounds? Currently some (but not all[1]) are documented to

Re: [Statistics] Convention when outside support?

Hi, I was involved in a similar debate on a different project, and we came to the conclusion that (double -> double) methods in Java should return NaN in the case of invalid arguments, rather than throw Exceptions. Our reasoning was by analogy with how IEEE 754 floating-point exceptions are