Skip to main content
Cross Validated

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

Required fields*

6
  • $\begingroup$ I appreciate the effort. I'm going to have to really study this because it's not my "native tongue". Also, I'm seeing a lot of dollar signs and formatting stuff. Is there something I don't know about that makes it look like real math? $\endgroup$ Commented Nov 18, 2010 at 17:17
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @Mike See meta.stats.stackexchange.com/q/218/919 . $\endgroup$ Commented Nov 18, 2010 at 18:12
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ It's a little late, but I finally got time to sit down and re-create your argument. The key was "multinomial coefficient". I had tried figuring it out using plain old binomial coefficients and I was getting all balled up. Thanks again for a nice answer. $\endgroup$ Commented Jan 25, 2011 at 17:29
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Picky point almost 14 years later.... "Because order statistics have Beta distributions..." might be interpreted as meaning the order statistics for $X_1, X_2, ...X_n$ drawn from any distribution have Beta distributions. Only order statistics $X_1, X_2, ...X_n$ drawn from Unif(0,1) have Beta distributions. In general, the order statistics of $X_1, X_2, ...X_n$ will not follow named distributions. $\endgroup$ Commented Jul 28, 2024 at 22:47
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @Mkanders Thank you for pointing that out. I will include "...uniform..." in that assertion. $\endgroup$ Commented Jul 29, 2024 at 13:46