Talk:Erlang distribution

message: this article should be kept, since Erlang is also used in domains that are less familiar with the general gamma distribution.  Isn't \lambda the same as the standard deviation - a term less used in formal statistics but still used in other domains.  What is its relationship to the Weibull distribution, now often used because it is available in spreadsheets as MS Excel. GioCM (talk) 19:54, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

message: In the section "Probability density function" the article currently says that the gamma is a generalization using the gamma function instead of the factorial function. While this is true in a very real sense, the formula we provided for the Erlang already uses the gamma function in its denominator, and not a factorial at all. This could cause confusion for people who aren't familiar with these functions/distributions. I propose altering the pdf formula to use a factorial function, which is mathematically appropriate because the parameter is always integral for the Erlang distribution. It is also more approachable to talk about factorials than the gamma function, which is rather elaborately defined. For an integer k, it is always the case that Gamma(k) = (k-1)!.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kruggable (talk • contribs) 14:36, 31 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Factorial Function 

message: === The explanation of the waiting time interpretation uses imprecise language ===
I think that, "the waiting times between k occurrences of the event are Erlang distributed," should be changed to "the waiting time until the kth occurrence of the event," which I would say is equivalent to "the waiting time between k+1 occurrences of the event".
=== More specific definition of cumulative would be welcome ===
I assume the posted formula for the cdf is over a range from 0 to x. Is this correct? I've found this integral difficult to perform, hence my question.
=== Please define constants in equation ===
Please define the constants in the equation. I would but I don't know what they are!
:Huh? The parameter n is explained in the preceding text, x is defined by function abstraction, and e is Euler's number. Am I missing something here? --MarkSweep 03:47, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: sorry, I just couldn't find them.Pdbailey 23:04, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)

text: There is no such thing as a cumulative DENSITY function. The letters "CDF" stand for "cumulative distribution function". The words "cumulative" and "density" contradict each other. Michael Hardy (talk) 18:43, 23 February 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Comments 

message: Please define the constants in the equation. I would but I don't know what they are!
:Huh? The parameter n is explained in the preceding text, x is defined by function abstraction, and e is Euler's number. Am I missing something here? --MarkSweep 03:47, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: sorry, I just couldn't find them.Pdbailey 23:04, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Please define constants in equation 

message: The two equivalent formulations of the Probability density function are so trivially equivalent that one of them should be deleted.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.96.243.196 (talk) 18:09, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Probability density function 

message: The Cumulative Density Function is wrong. It should be 1 - ...  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.87.53.219 (talk) 11:38, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: There is no such thing as a cumulative DENSITY function. The letters "CDF" stand for "cumulative distribution function". The words "cumulative" and "density" contradict each other. Michael Hardy (talk) 18:43, 23 February 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cumulative Density Function 

message: The example plots of the PDF and CDF  refer to \mu instead of \beta. Either the variable names in the legends or the variable names in the text need to be changed.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.72.161.224 (talk) 14:57, 16 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Graphs