An observation.



y = 34.856 Ln(x) + 1.2837

where x is roughly (income/$10,000) [which is how the chart is built].

That's the curve Excel shows as a remarkably good ( sorry, no Kolmogrov for now, if that even works on ln() based curves - I forget ) fit for
a household income CDF, based on the data at:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Income-curve-%2410k.png

as part of

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Household_income_in_the_United_States

Am I wrong? Clearly, ln() curves have no natural asymptope, so
it'd peter out based on some limit, preserving convergence
to 100%*, but it sure *LOOKS* good :) I'd expetc wierdness at
the tails...

*yes, that's the sound of one hand waving.... on the other hand...

--
Les Cargill
.



Relevant Pages

  • Re: New underground lines in Liverpool?
    ... And I suppose it has helped to ensure that the Curves have not been ... built on, as were that to happen reinstatement would be pretty much ... Neil Williams ...
    (uk.railway)
  • Re: An observation
    ... Les Cargill wrote: ... where x is roughly [which is how the chart is built]. ... That's the curve Excel shows as a remarkably good based curves - I forget) fit for ... Clearly, lncurves have no natural asymptope, so ...
    (sci.econ)
  • An observation
    ... where x is roughly [which is how the chart is built]. ... That's the curve Excel shows as a remarkably good (sorry, no Kolmogrov for now, if that even works on ln() based curves - I forget) fit for ... Clearly, lncurves have no natural asymptope, so ...
    (sci.econ)