Reputation
1,435
Top tag
Next privilege 2,000 Rep.
Edit questions and answers
Badges
3 11 32
Impact
~73k people reached

Feb
10
awarded  Favorite Question
Jan
17
answered Unusual mathematical terms
Jan
10
awarded  Yearling
Sep
30
awarded  Explainer
Jul
15
comment “I have found a dead body on my car.”
Related: math.stackexchange.com/q/513317/56801
Jul
15
comment Poker blind interest equation
$(4300/50)^{(1/9)}-1=0.6403\dots$
Jul
2
awarded  Curious
May
14
accepted Is a log-normal distribution uniquely determined by its moments or not?
May
14
asked Is a log-normal distribution uniquely determined by its moments or not?
May
14
comment How does one 'correct' a table that doesn't add up to $100\%$?
I could do that, but I must admit that I'm not very familiar with centroids, hypercubes and hyperplanes. That way it might become obvious that I don't know much at all. :) I thought that the question as such must have been thought of by many people. For example those making graphs and pie charts and such.
May
13
revised How does one 'correct' a table that doesn't add up to $100\%$?
added 279 characters in body
May
13
comment How does one 'correct' a table that doesn't add up to $100\%$?
@EmmadKareem Because if the error would be $-1\%$, some $\text{E}(y_i)$s (e.g. those belonging to $x_i=0$) could become less than zero. That indicates that that procedure cannot be right.
May
13
comment How does one 'correct' a table that doesn't add up to $100\%$?
Thank you. The first paragraph, I think, captures my problem. However, the problem is that the symmetry (as mentioned in your second paragraph) applies only to numbers from $1$ through $99$. $0$ and $100$ are different. And in the tables that I have to work with, there are $0$s (as mentioned in the question). :(
May
13
revised How does one 'correct' a table that doesn't add up to $100\%$?
added 260 characters in body
May
13
comment How does one 'correct' a table that doesn't add up to $100\%$?
For example take $10\%$, $80\%$ and $11\%$. Total $101\%$. Just scaling those down would obviously yield $100\%$. But $80\%\cdot 100/101=79.2079\ldots$ will now round to $79\%$ instead of $80\%$. So, this cannot be right.
May
13
comment How does one 'correct' a table that doesn't add up to $100\%$?
Yes, but I think that in some cases that $\text{E}(y_i)$ won't round to $x_i$ anymore. That's why I came up with the explicit prior distribution.
May
13
revised How does one 'correct' a table that doesn't add up to $100\%$?
added 67 characters in body
May
13
revised How does one 'correct' a table that doesn't add up to $100\%$?
added 58 characters in body
May
13
revised How does one 'correct' a table that doesn't add up to $100\%$?
edited tags
May
13
comment How does one 'correct' a table that doesn't add up to $100\%$?
@RossMillikan I'm fully aware that any $y$s don't change the $x$s. I'm only interested in reasonable estimates of the $y$s. The $x$s stay exactly what they were.