Paper detail

The Effect of Limited Sample Sizes on the Accuracy of the Estimated Scaling Parameter for Power-Law-Distributed Solar Data

Many natural processes exhibit power-law behavior. The power-law exponent is linked to the underlying physical process and therefore its precise value is of interest. With respect to the energy content of nanoflares, for example, a power-law exponent steeper than 2 is believed to be a necessary condition to solve the enigmatic coronal heating problem. Studying power-law distributions over several orders of magnitudes requires sufficient data and appropriate methodology. In this paper we demonstrate the shortcomings of some popular methods in solar physics that are applied to data of typical sample sizes. We use synthetic data to study the effect of the sample size on the performance of different estimation methods and show that vast amounts of data are needed to obtain a reliable result with graphical methods (where the power-law exponent is estimated by a linear fit on a log-transformed histogram of the data). We revisit published results on power laws for the angular width of solar coronal mass ejections and the radiative losses of nanoflares. We demonstrate the benefits of the maximum likelihood estimator and advocate its use.

preprint2016arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access4 authors1 topic

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 map preview

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.