5
$\begingroup$

I have been reviewing our quasi-related threads, and have edited the wiki excerpt of to read:

In GLMs, quasi-likelihood estimation is a way to allow over- or under-dispersion by choosing an appropriate variance function. It's often used for count data, e.g. in quasi-binomial or quasi-Poisson models; there it does not correspond to any actual count distribution.

I would suggest to make ×13 and [quasi-poisson] (currently not existing) synonyms of this more general [quasi-likelihood] tag. I don't think we have enough threads to warrant splitting this into narrow sub-tags.

In fact, I was going to manually retag all [quasi-binomial] questions into [quasi-likelihood]+[binomial], but @Glen_b suggested to raise it on Meta, and it's probably a good idea to have these synonym mappings anyway.

| |
$\endgroup$
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I have also found a bunch of questions about quasi-Poisson that did not have any quasi- tag. I tagged a few with [quasi-likelihood]. This supports the idea of creating synonyms. $\endgroup$ – amoeba Nov 17 '17 at 11:33
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Maybe we should change the quoted excerpt by saying "It's often used for binary or count data" and removing "count" in the end. $\endgroup$ – amoeba Nov 17 '17 at 13:26
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I have shortened that wiki excerpt to conform with our length policy. BTW, manual retagging is not needed (and should be strongly discouraged because it alters the site systematically in a way that is difficult to reverse): once a synonym has been established, the system will apply it automatically. That's one of the main points of using synonyms! $\endgroup$ – whuber Nov 17 '17 at 14:21
  • $\begingroup$ I think the link should have been to here: stats.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2848 @whuber. I thought in this case it's important to mention quasi-binomial and quasi-poisson. But actually if we have synonyms that they will appear nearby anyway, when one is selecting a tag for a new question. Re manual retagging: I know! I thought with 15 Qs it does not really matter. But yes. $\endgroup$ – amoeba Nov 17 '17 at 14:38
  • $\begingroup$ Sorry--I cut off the last digit of the question number when pasting the link. It's fixed now. $\endgroup$ – whuber Nov 17 '17 at 14:46
2
$\begingroup$

Both synonyms were created by @gung some time ago.

| |
$\endgroup$

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .