This function estimates the parameters of the Kappa distribution given the L-moments of the data in an L-moment object such as that returned by lmoms. The relations between distribution parameters and L-moments are seen under lmomkap, but of relevance to this documentation, the upper bounds of L-kurtosis (\(\tau_4\)) and a function of L-skew (\(\tau_3\)) is given by
$$\tau_4 < \frac{5\tau_3^2+1}{6}$$
This bounds is equal to the Generalized Logistic distribution (parglo) and failure occurs if this upper bounds is exceeded. However, the argument snap.tau4, if set, will set \(\tau_4\) equal to the upper bounds of \(\tau_4\) of the distribution to the relation above. This value of \(\tau_4\) should be close enough numerically The argument nudge.tau4 is provided to offset \(\tau_4\) downward just a little. This keeps the relation operator as “\(<\)” in the bounds above to match Hosking's tradition as his sources declare “\(\ge\)” as above the GLO. The nudge here hence is not zero, which is a little different compared to the conceptually similar snapping in paraep4.
parkap(lmom, checklmom=TRUE,
snap.tau4=FALSE, nudge.tau4=sqrt(.Machine$double.eps), ...)An R
list is returned.
The type of distribution: kap.
The parameters of the distribution.
The source of the parameters: “parkap”.
The support (or range) of the fitted distribution.
A numeric failure code.
A text message for the failure code.
An L-moment object created by lmoms or vec2lmom.
Should the lmom be checked for validity using the are.lmom.valid function. Normally this should be left as the default and it is very unlikely that the L-moments will not be viable (particularly in the \(\tau_4\) and \(\tau_3\) inequality). However, for some circumstances or large simulation exercises then one might want to bypass this check.
A logical to “snap” the \(\tau_4\) downwards to the lower boundary if the given \(\tau_4\) is greater than the boundary described as above.
An offset to the snapping of \(\tau_4\) intended to move \(\tau_4\) just below the upper bounds. (The absolute value of the nudge is made internally to ensure only downward adjustment by a subtraction operation.)
Other arguments to pass.
W.H. Asquith
Hosking, J.R.M., 1994, The four-parameter kappa distribution: IBM Journal of Reserach and Development, v. 38, no. 3, pp. 251--258.
Hosking, J.R.M., and Wallis, J.R., 1997, Regional frequency analysis---An approach based on L-moments: Cambridge University Press.
lmomkap,
cdfkap, pdfkap, quakap