Talk:Range (statistics)

Discussion of a major edit

On 30/04/2025, I have done a major edit of this page:

Removed the remark that the range seems most useful for small datasets:

   * I haven't been able to read the source for the claim, but it seems extremely suspicious to me.
   * Even if the claim is correct, it then requires a detailed explanation. Linking an intuitive claim to a paywalled source provides absolutely no contet for the claim beyond a call to authority, which sounds unacceptable to me in a mathematical context.

Removed the section on the non*IDD continuous case:

 * This is a very marginal case. I've added it as a remark. If I was sole author, I would cut it completely.

Removed the section on the discrete case:

   * The original statement is incorrect. You cannot generally go from a discrete variable to one supported on N without loss of generality.
   * The source instead focuses on only those variables which are supported on N
   * The result is very marginal. I've added it as a remark. If I was sole author, I would cut it completely.
   * If you restore this, please make sure to edit it to be correct.

Removed the discrete uniform distribution: it's marginal and uninteresting.

Reworked the derivation:

   * the original derivation was very incorrect
   * I've tried to improve upon it
   * I don't feel quite right about this derivation: I've asked a question on stackexchange to improve it further.
   * If you have ideas on how to improve it further, please give it a shot

Definition

"In the descriptive statistics, the range of a set of data is the difference between the largest and smallest values.[1] It is the smallest interval..." The difference between two values is a number, not an interval. Is it meant that the word is used to mean both

the difference between the largest and smallest values and
the smallest interval containing all the values

--Thehalfone (talk) 08:57, 21 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You're right that this was poorly written, I've added "size of" before the interval description to clarify that the definition should be (1) in your post, not (2). Thanks Gareth Jones (talk) 11:37, 21 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Overcomplication

Oh my god, talk about overcomplicating things. The first sentence is fine, and really all that is needed for most kids who would come here. the rest is pompous crap. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.193.171.69 (talk) 00:04, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]