Paper detail

Multinomial, Poisson and Gaussian statistics in count data analysis

It is generally known that counting statistics is not correctly described by a Gaussian approximation. Nevertheless, in neutron scattering, it is common practice to apply this approximation to the counting statistics; also at low counting numbers. We show that the application of this approximation leads to skewed results not only for low-count features, such as background level estimation, but also for its estimation at double-digit count numbers. In effect, this approximation is shown to be imprecise on all levels of count. Instead, a Multinomial approach is introduced as well as a more standard Poisson method, which we compare with the Gaussian case. These two methods originate from a proper analysis of a multi-detector setup and a standard triple axis instrument.We devise a simple mathematical procedure to produce unbiased fits using the Multinomial distribution and demonstrate this method on synthetic and actual inelastic scattering data. We find that the Multinomial method provide almost unbiased results, and in some cases outperforms the Poisson statistics. Although significantly biased, the Gaussian approach is in general more robust in cases where the fitted model is not a true representation of reality. For this reason, a proper data analysis toolbox for low-count neutron scattering should therefore contain more than one model for counting statistics.

preprint2020arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.