Maximum likelihood estimation of parameters of spherical particle size distributions from profile size measurements and its application for small samples

Ekaterina Poliakova

Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2008.09091

Maximum likelihood estimation of parameters of spherical particle size distributions from profile size measurements and its application for small samples

Ekaterina Poliakova

View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Microscopy research often requires recovering particle-size distributions in three dimensions from only a few (10 - 200) profile measurements in the section. This problem is especially relevant for petrographic and mineralogical studies, where parametric assumptions are reasonable and finding distribution parameters from the microscopic study of small sections is essential. This paper deals with the specific case where particles are approximately spherical (i.e. Wicksell's problem). The paper presents a novel approximation of the probability density of spherical particle profile sizes. This approximation uses the actual non-smoothness of mineral particles rather than perfect spheres. The new approximation facilitates the numerically efficient use of the maximum likelihood method, a generally powerful method that provides the distribution parameter estimates of the minimal variance in most practical cases. The variance and bias of the estimates by the maximum likelihood method were compared numerically for several typical particle-size distributions with those by alternative parametric methods (method of moments and minimum distance estimation), and the maximum likelihood estimation was found to be preferable for both small and large samples. The maximum likelihood method, along with the suggested approximation, may also be used for selecting a model, for constructing narrow confidence intervals for distribution parameters using all the profiles without random sampling and for including the measurements of the profiles intersected by section boundaries. The utility of the approach is illustrated using an example from glacier ice petrography.

Explore related subjects

stat.ME stat.AP

Keep this discovery

BibTeX RIS

Ekaterina Poliakova. 2020-08-20. Maximum likelihood estimation of parameters of spherical particle size distributions from profile size measurements and its application for small samples. https://arxiv.org/abs/2008.09091

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

Surprise Reduction and Nullification in Bayesian and Inverse Bayesian Inference under Ambiguous Prediction-Error Attribution

In non-stationary environments, prediction errors may signal environmental change or transient outliers, and adaptive systems must track such changes without overreacting to outliers. We distinguish surprise reduction, which updates beliefs to fit observations, from surprise nullification, which weakens constraints imposed by the predictive structure, and formalize both within Bayesian and inverse Bayesian (BIB) inference. Belief and likelihood updates are derived from variational objectives sharing a nullification strength, determined endogenously by minimizing surprise under the candidate post-update predictive distribution. In the Gaussian case, nullification expands belief and likelihood variances by a common factor relative to standard Bayesian updating, leaving the ratio unchanged. BIB thus defers attribution of the prediction error, committing to neither latent-state change nor observation-process uncertainty. The nullification strength is carried over as a candidate and is maintained or released according to the predictive surprise of the next observation. In a mean estimation task with outliers and changepoints, no scanned parameter setting of a Sage-Husa-type adaptive Kalman filter, fixed-strength BIB variant, or belief-forgetting-only variant outperforms BIB in both changepoint tracking and post-outlier stability. An oracle-informed reduced Bayesian model tracks changepoints better but is less stable after outliers. Although BIB maintains no explicit hypotheses about changepoints or outliers, it generates event-dependent dynamics. The learning rate increases after changepoints, whereas after outliers, nullification is released, and this increase is suppressed. Deferring attribution and letting subsequent observations differentiate the responses may constitute a principle of adaptive inference in non-stationary environments.

stat.ME↗

arXiv2026

Generalized Ridge Refitting for the Lasso and Prediction Improvement Bounds

We study a class of Lasso based estimators obtained by applying a quadratic correction on the Lasso equicorrelation set. The penalty matrix determines both the magnitude and geometry of the correction and contains, among other cases, the isotropic Lasso--Ridge correction, least squares refitting, Gram proportional interpolation between the Lasso and least squares, and coordinate specific penalties. We first derive a closed form representation and isolate the positive gain component of the resulting prediction improvement. We then control the remaining stochastic linear term in expectation by localizing the random signed equicorrelation model around a deterministic reference support. This yields a finite sample expectation bound that explicitly accounts for the randomness induced by Lasso model selection. The resulting decomposition provides a unified framework for understanding when Lasso based quadratic corrections can improve prediction.

stat.ME↗

arXiv2026

Discretization in covariate-adaptive randomization: gains and losses

Covariate-adaptive randomization(CAR) is widely implemented in clinical trials to balance prognostic covariates across treatment arms. Continuous covariates are often discretized into strata in practice, yet their consequences are not clearly understood. This paper provides a comprehensive study of the impact of discretization on both the CAR design process and the inferential results thereafter. We establish the asymptotic properties of both imbalance measures and treatment effect estimators under discretized and non-discretized settings. Practical recommendations are given on when and how discretization should be employed. We show that discretization in design is generally recommended, as it enhances robustness against model misspecification. However, if the true model is known, the most efficient strategy is to balance covariates according to that model in the design. The theoretical results are corroborated by extensive simulation studies and an empirical application to a diabetes trial dataset. Together, the results clarify the gains and losses of discretization in CAR and pave the way for learning impact of discretization to other designs and beyond.

stat.ME↗