Accurate Efficient Evaluation of Cumulative or Exceedance Probability Distributions Directly from Characteristic Functions
Abstract
An accurate and efficient method of evaluating the entire cumulative or exceedance probability distribution, via one fast Fourier transform of the sampled characteristic function, is presented. The sampling rate applied to the characteristic function results in aliasing of the probability density function, while the limited extent of the sampling gives rise to a systematic disturbance in the calculated probability distribution. Both types of errors are easily recognizable and can be controlled by a trail and error procedure whereby the calculated distributions are plotted for observation and modification. The size of the fast Fourier transform determines the number of distribution values available, but has no effect upon the acccuracy of the result. Regardless of the number of characteristic function evaluations required for accurate results, the storage required is just that corresponding to the size of the fast Fourier transform. A program for the procedure is presented, and the inputs required of the user are indicated. Several representative examples and plots illustrate the utility of the approach.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Under the Gaussian coefficient model, and assuming the MSCN coefficients are zero mean and unit variance, the products of neighboring MSCN coefficients obey a specified asymmetric distribution in the absence of distortion.
“Under the Gaussian coefficient model, and assuming the MSCN coeffficients are zero mean and unit variance, these products obey the following distribution in the absence of distortion [34]:”
From No-Reference Image Quality Assessment in the Spatial Domain (2012) · cites this paper as [34]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
No-Reference Image Quality Assessment in the Spatial Domain
Mittal, A., Moorthy, A. K., & Bovik, A. C. (2012) · IEEE Transactions on Image Processing · doi:10.1109/tip.2012.2214050 · Cited by 6,064 · see citing works
- Authors
- Nuttall, A. H.
- Corresponding author
- Nuttall, Albert H.
- Publisher
- Defense Technical Information Center
- Published
- 1983-10-01
- OpenAlex
- W270564048
- Cited by
- 29
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2025: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 3 · 2017: 1 · 2015: 1 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 1
- Type
- report
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Defense Technical Information Center (DTIC) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Distribution Estimation and Applications
- Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Probability and Statistical Research
- Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Applied Mathematics › Statistical and numerical algorithms
- Keywords
- characteristic function, cumulative distribution function, exceedance probability, probability density function, fast Fourier transform, sampling frequency, aliasing, numerical inversion, density estimation
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review