A generalization of the Log-Lindley distribution – its properties and applications
S. Chakraborty1*, S. H. Ong2 and C. M. Ng2
1
2

Department of Statistics, Dibrugarh University, India

Institute of Mathematical Sciences, University of Malaya, Malaysia
* Corresponding author. Email: subrata_stats@dibru.ac.in

(Version II-21st October 2017)
Abstract
An extension of the two-parameter Log-Lindley distribution of Gomez et al. (2014) with
support in (0, 1) is proposed. Its important properties like cumulative distribution
function, moments, survival function, hazard rate function, Shannon entropy, stochastic n
ordering and convexity (concavity) conditions are derived. An application in distorted
premium principal is outlined and parameter estimation by method of maximum
likelihood is also presented. We also consider use of a re-parameterized form of the
proposed distribution in regression modeling for bounded responses by considering a
modeling of real life data in comparison with beta regression and log-Lindley regression
models.
1. Introduction
In statistical research many attempts have been made to introduce alternative to the
classical beta distribution (see Gomez et al., 2014 for details). But most of these
distributions involved special functions in their formulations barring the Kumaraswamy
distribution (Jones, 2012).

Distribution with support (0, 1) and having a compact

cumulative distribution function (cdf) can be used as a distortion function to define a
premium principle. Recently, a new pdf with bounded support in (0,1) was introduced by
Gomez et al. (2014), as an alternative to the classical beta distribution by suitable
transformation of a particular case of the generalized Lindley distribution proposed by
Zakerzadeh and Dolati (2010). The new distribution called Log-Lindley (LL) distribution
Preprint Version II

1

has compact expressions for the moments as well as the cdf. Gomez et al. (2014) studied
its important properties relevant to the insurance and inventory management applications.
The new model is also shown to be appropriate regression model to model bounded
responses as an alternative to the beta regression model. The LL distribution of Gomez et
al. (2014) is probably the latest in a series of proposals as alternatives to the classical beta
distribution. Unlike its predecessors the main attraction of the LL distribution is that it
has nice compact forms for the probability density function (pdf), cdf and moments,
which do not involve any special functions.
The LL distribution of Gomez et al. (2014) is given by
Pdf: f ( x; ,  ) 

2
(  log x ) x 1 , 0  x  1,   0,   0
1  

(1)

Cdf: F ( x; ,  ) 

x [1   (  log x)]
1  

(2)

Moments: E ( X r ; ,  ) 

 2 1   (r   )
, r   ,2,1,1, 2, 
1   (r   ) 2

(3)

In this paper we attempt to extend the LL distribution to provide another distribution
in (0, 1) having compact expressions for the pdf, cdf and moments and study its
properties and applications.
2. Extended Log-Lindley distribution LL p ( ,  )
The LL distribution of Gomez et al., (2014) was obtained from a two-parameter
particular case of the three-parameter generalized Lindley (GL) distribution of
Zakerzadeh and Dolati (2010) which has the pdf

 2 ( x) 1 (   x)e x
f ( x) 
, 0  x  1,   0,   0 .
(   )  (  1)
Gomez et al. (2014) first substituted   1 and then employed the transformation

X  log(1 / Y ) to obtain their LL distribution in (1).
In this section, we extend their proposal by employing the same transformation to
the GL distribution directly to derive what we call the generalized Log-Lindley

2

distribution. This proposed three-parameter distribution can be seen as an extension of
the LL distribution of Gomez et al. (2014) with an additional parameter ‘p’. We denote
the new distribution by LL p ( ,  ) . The pdf and cdf of the proposed distribution are given
respectively by
f ( x;  ,  , p) 

 2 p
( log x ) p (  log x ) x  1 ,
(1  p)[1  p   ]
0  x  1,   0,   0, p  0

(4)

and

F ( x;  ,  , p ) 

[ x   (1  p   ) Ei( p,   log x )] ( log x)1 p
(1  p ) [1  p   ]

(5)



where Ei(n, z )   e  zt / t n dt  z n1(1  n, z ) is the exponential integral and (1  n, z ) is
z

the upper incomplete gamma function. In particular, the recurrence relations

n Ei(n  1, z )  e  z  zEi(n, z ) and

d
Ei(n, z )   zEi (n  1, z )
dz

can be utilized in conjunction with Ei(0, z )  e  z / z to obtain expressions for higher
integral values on n. Moreover, as z   , Ei(n, z )  e  z / z (see http:// mathworld.
wolfram.com/ En-Function.html for more results).
Alternatively, we can write the cdf in (5) in terms of upper incomplete gamma function as
x ( log x )1 p  (1  p   )(1  p, log x )
.
F ( x; ,  , p ) 
(1  p ) [1  p   ]
p

Further using the result ( p  1, y )  p! e  y  y k / k! for integer p, the cdf can be written
k 0

in a compact from devoid of any special function as
p

x  ( log x)1 p  (1  p   ) p! x   ( log x) k / k!
F ( x; ,  , p) 

k 0

(1  p   ) p!

3

.

Important particular cases of LL p ( ,  ) :
i.

for p  0 , we get back the LL distribution of Gomez et al. (2014) in (1).

ii.

for p  0,  1 , as    , LL p ( ,  )  Uniform (0, 1) .

iii.

for p  1 , we get new LL1 ( ,  ) distribution as:

Pdf: f ( x;  ,  ) 

3
( log x)(  log x) x 1 ,
[2   ]

Cdf: F ( x;  ,  ) 

x [2     log x (2     log x )]
2  

 3 [(r   )   2]
Moment: E ( X ;  ,  ) 
,
(r   ) 3 [2   ]
r

iv.

0  x  1,   0,   0

r   ,2,1, 1, 2, 

(7)

(8)

(9)

for p  2 , we get new LL2 ( ,  ) distribution as

Pdf: f ( x;  ,  ) 

4
( log x) 2 (  log x ) x 1 ,
6  2

Cdf: F ( x; ,  ) 

x  [6  2   log x {6  2   log x (3     log x)}]
6  2

Moment: E ( X r ;  ,  ) 

 4 [ 2 ( r   )  6]
,
2(r   ) 4 (3   )

0  x  1,   0,   0

r   ,2,1, 1, 2, 

(10)

(11)

(12)

2.1 Shape of LL p ( ,  ) distributions
Here we have drawn some illustrative pdf of LL p ( ,  ) distributions for different choices
of parameters  ,  and index p to study their shapes. It is observed that the distribution
can be positively or negatively skewed and symmetrical. The pdf can also be increasing
or decreasing.

4

(a)

(b)

(c)

(d)

(e)

(f)

Figure 1. Pdf plots of LL p ( ,  ) when p = 0 (red), 1 (green), 3(blue), 5 (brown), 7
(light green) for (a)   20,   0.001 (b)   5,   0.1 (c)   20,   5 (d)

  2,   0.1 (e)   0.5,   10 (f)   0.9,   0

5

2.2 Moment
Here we derive general result for moments of LL p ( ,  ) distribution and obtain its
particular cases.

 2  p ((r   )   (1  p ))
E ( X ; ,  ) 
, r  ,2,1,1, 2,
(r   ) 2  p [1  p   ]
r

  
In particular, E ( X ; ,  )  

1  

2 p

1  p   (1   )
.
1  p  

(13)

(14)

2.3 Mode
The mode plays an important role in the usefulness of a distribution. For the LL p ( ,  )
distribution the mode occurs at

exp[{1  p   (1   )  4 p (  1)  (1  p   (1   ))2 } / 2(1   )] .
2.4 Survival and Hazard Rate functions
S ( x; ,  , p ) 



r ( x;  ,  , p ) 



(1  p   ){(1  p)  ( log x)1 p Ei ( p,   log x)}  x  ( log x)1 p
(1  p) [1  p   ]
(1  p   ){ (1  p)  (1  p, log x)}  x ( log x )1 p
(1  p )[1  p   ]

 2 ( log x ) p (  log x ) x  1
(1  p   ){(1  p)  ( log x )1 p Ei( p,   log x )}  x  ( log x)1 p

 2 (  log x)( log x ) p
(1  p   ){(1  p)  (1  p, log x)}  x  ( log x)1 p

(15)

It can be easily checked that for p  0 , the above results reduce to those of the LL0 ( ,  )
distribution of Gomez et al. (2014). When p is an integer the expressions can be written
p

in compact form using the result ( p  1, y )  p! e  y  y k / k!.
k 0

6

Some illustrative plots of the hazard function of LL p ( ,  ) distributions for different
choices of parameters  ,  and index p are presented in Figure 2, which reveals that the
hazard function can be increasing and bath-tub shaped.

Figure 2. Hazard rate function plots of LL p ( ,  ) when p = 0 (red), 1 (green), 3 (blue), 5
(brown), 7 (light green) for (a)   0.9,   2 (b)   2,   2 (c)   5,   2
2.5 Shannon Entropy of LL p ( ,  )
Here we derive the Shannon entropy of LL p ( ,  ) in terms of that of LL0 ( ,  ) .
H p ( X )  E[ log f ( X ;  ,  , p)]

 

 2 p
  E log 
( log X ) p (  log X ) X  1  

   (1  p)[1  p   ]


 2 p
  log 
 pE log (log(1 / X )  E[log{(  log X ) X  1}]

 (1  p)[1  p   ] 


 2 p
  log 
  pE log (log(1 / X )
  (1  p)[1  p   ] 

  2

 2 
 E log 
(  log X ) X  1   log 


1   
 1  
 (1  p   )(1  p) 
 log 
  pE[log (log(1 / X )]  H 0 ( X )
(1   )  p



(16)

It can be checked that for p  0 , H p ( X ) reduces to H 0 ( X ) , the Shannon entropy of
LL0 ( ,  ) which is the Log-Lindley (see proposition 2 in page 51 of Gomez et al., 2014).

7

For integral values of index parameter p, exact expression for Elog (log(1 / X )] can be
obtained using Mathematica as follows.
p  1, E log {log(1 / X )} 

3    (2   )(  log  )
2  

p  2, E log {log(1 / X )} 

11  3  2(3   )(  log  )
6  2

p  3, E log {log(1 / X )} 

50  11  6(4   )(  log  )
24  6

p  4, E log {log(1 / X )} 

274  50  24(5   )(  log  )
,…
120  24

Thus, for p  1 , Shannon Entropy for LL1 ( ,  ) using (16) is given by
 (2   )  3    (2   )(  log  )
H1 ( X )  log 

 H0( X ) .
2
2  
 (1   ) 

2.6 Stochastic Ordering
We will consider the likelihood ratio (LR), hazard rate (HR) and stochastic (ST)
orderings for LL p ( ,  ) random variables in this section.
Theorem1. Let X 1 and X 2 be random variables following LL p1 (1 , 1 ) and LL p2 ( 2 , 2 )
distributions, respectively. If 1   2 , 1  2 and p2  p1 then X1  LR X 2 .
Proof: Consider the ratio
2 p

f ( x;  2 , 2 , p2 )  2 2 (1  p1 )[1  p1  11 ]

( log x) p2  p1 h( x )
f ( x; 1 , 1 , p1 ) 12 p1 (1  p2 )[1  p2  2 2 ]

where h( x) 

(17)

2  log x  2 1
x
. Gomez-Deniz et al. (2014) has shown that the function
1  log x

h(x) is non-decreasing for x  (0,1) if 1   2 , 1  2 . Here, if p2  p1 , it is clear that
( log x ) p2  p1 is non-decreasing for x  (0,1) . This implies that if 1   2 , 1  2 and

p2  p1 , then the ratio in (17) is non-decreasing for x  (0,1) and hence, X1  LR X 2 .

8

The result on LR ordering leads to the following (Gomez-Deniz et al., 2014):
X 1  LR X 2  X 1  HR X 2  X 1  ST X 2 . Therefore, similar results as in Corollary 1 of
Gomez-Deniz et al. (2014) can be shown for the new log-Lindley distribution as follows.
Corollary 1. Let X1 and

X 2 be random variables following LL p1 (1 , 1 ) and

LL p2 ( 2 , 2 ) distributions, respectively. If 1   2 , 1  2 and p2  p1 , then

a. the moments, E[ X 1k ]  E[ X 2k ] for all k  0 ;
b. the hazard rates, r1 ( x)  r2 ( x) for all x  (0,1) .
2.7 Convexity and Concavity for Generalized Log-Lindley Distribution
For brevity, we suppress the cdf notation for LL p  ,   distribution in (5) as F (x) in this
section.
Theorem 2: If 0   1 , p  0 and   0 , then F (x) is concave for x  (0,1) . Hence,
for 0   1 , F (x) is also log-concave for x  (0,1) since F ( x)  0 .
Proof: If 0   1 , then ( log x) p , (  log x) and ( x ) 1 are decreasing in x  (0,1) for

p  0 and   0 . This implies that the pdf
F ( x)  f ( x; ,  , p ) 

 2 p
( log x) p (  log x ) x  1 ,
(1  p )[1  p   ]

is decreasing in x  (0,1) . Thus, F (x) is concave for x  (0,1) .
Since F ( x)  0 , concavity implies F (x) is also log-concave for x  (0,1) .
Theorem 3. The function F (x) is not convex or concave for x  (0,1) for any   1 ,

p  0 and   0 .
Proof: For any   1 , p  0 and   0 , consider the second order derivative of F (x)
given by
F ( x ) 

 2 p

p  1
p 

x 1 ( log x) p1 (  1)(log x) 2    
 log x 

 (1  p )[1  p   ]
 1
  1



9

In order for

F (x)

to be convex,

F (x)

must be

0

or that the term


p  1
p 

2
 log x 
(log x )    
  0 for all x  (0,1) . However, when x  1 ,
 1
  1



p  1
p 
p

2
 0.
 log x 
(log x )    

 1 
  1
 1


Thus, F (x) is not convex for x  (0,1) for any   1 , p  0 and   0 .
When x  0 ,
 
p  1

 




p  1
p 
p
 1


2
2
(log
x
)



log
x


(log
x
)
1







.
 1
  1
log x
(  1)(log x) 2 






This implies that F (x) cannot be  0 for all x  (0,1) . Therefore, F (x) is not concave
for x  (0,1) for any   1 , p  0 and   0 .
Note: F (x) is convex for x  (0,1) only for p  0 and  (  1)  1 as shown in GomezDeniz et al. (2014).
3. Application to insurance premium loading
Theorem 4. If F ( x;  ,  ) of LL p ( ,  ) given by (5) is concave, then 1  F (1  x;  ,  ) is
a convex function from (0, 1) to (0, 1) for 0    1 and p  0,   0 .
Proof: It has been shown in Theorem 2 that the cdf F ( x;  ,  ) of LL p ( ,  ) is concave
for 0    1 and p  0,   0 . Hence, 1  F (1  x; ,  ) is a convex function from (0, 1) to
(0, 1).
Remark: F ( x;  ,  ) can be used as a distortion function to distort survival function (sf) of
a given random variable as stated in the corollary below.
Corollary 2. If X is the risk with sf G (x ) and let Z be a distorted random variable with sf


H  , ( x )  F [G ( x);  ,  ] for 0    1 and p  0,   0 . Let E[Z ] 

 F [G ( x); ,  ] dx
0

10



 P , ( X ) be the distorted premium and Pn ( X )   [G ( x)]n dx , 0  n  1 be the
0

proportional hazard premium (see Wang, 1995) of a insurance product respectively. Then
P , ( X ) is a premium principle such that
i.

Pn ( X )  P ,  ( X )  max( X ) , for all n  

ii.

P , (aX  b)  aP , ( X )  b ,

iii. if G1 ( X 1 ) and G1 ( X 2 ) are sf of two non negative risk random variables X 1 and

X 2 with G1 ( X 1 )  G2 ( X 2 ) , that is, X 1 precedes X 2 under first stochastic
dominance then P ,  ( X 1 )  P ,  ( X 2 ) ,

X 1 precedes

iv. if


X 2 under second stochastic dominance, that is, if



 G ( x ) dx   G ( x ) dx
1

1

1

x

2

2

2

for all x  0 then P ,  ( X 1 )  P ,  ( X 2 ) .

x

Proof: From theorem 2 above we know that F ( x;  ,  ) is concave for x  (0,1) when

0   1 , p  0 and   0 . Also being a cdf, it is an increasing function of x with
F (0; ,  )  0 and F (1; ,  )  1 .
The results (ii), (iii) and (iv) follow immediately from definition 6 of distortion premium
principle and subsequent properties thereof in Wang (1996).
For the result (i) from Wang (1996) it follows that P ,  ( X )  max( X ) .
Now we provide a proof of Pn ( X )  P ,  ( X ) . We first prove that for any p, F  x; ,  , p 
 x .
Case I: When p is an integer, we get
p



x
F  x; ,  , p  

1 p

1 p

( log x )

 (1  p   ) p! x



 ( log x)
k 0

(1  p   ) p!

11

k

/ k!

p

( log x ) k
( log x )1 p 

 x  1  

x .
k
!
(
1

p


)
p
!
 k 1


Case II: For real p, we apply the integral representation (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
Incomplete_gamma_function; see section “Evaluation Formulae”)


(1  p, y )  e

y

y

1 p

 yu

 e 1  u 

p

du

0



p

 e  y y1 p  e  yu  u  du  e  y  e  t t  p 11dt  e  y (1  p )
0

0

Hence,

x
F  x;  ,  , p  



( log x)1 p  (1  p   )(1  p, log x)
(1  p ) [1  p   ]


x ( log x)1 p  (1  p   )e log x  (1  p)
( log x)1 p 


 x 1 
  x
(1  p) [1  p   ]
 (1  p) [1  p   ] 
Therefore for any p, F  x; ,  , p   x . It follows that
F ( x; ,  )  x  x  F ( x; ,  ) for x  (0,1)
 (G ( x ))  F (G ( x ); ,  ) since 0  G ( x )  1 for all x   .
 (G ( x ))  F (G ( x ); ,  ) for all x   .
Now, for all x   , we have
(G ( x )) n  F (G ( x ); ,  ) when 0    n  1




0

0

  (G ( x )) n dx   F (G ( x); ,  ))dx  Pn ( X )  P , ( X ) .

Note: This new distorted premium principle is a tradeoff between the proportional hazard
premium

and

maximal

loss.

For

n  1,

Pn ( X )  E ( X )

and

Pn ( X )  max( X ) (see Wang, 1995).
4. Parameter Estimation: Maximum Likelihood Estimation
The likelihood function for a random sample of size n from the LL p  ,   is

 n( 2 p )
L
(1  p)(1  p   )n

 n

   log xi 
 i 1

12

p

n

 (  log x ) x
i

i 1

1

.

for

n  0,

The log-likelihood function is then given by
n

l  log L  n(2  p) log   n log  (1  p )  n log(1  p   )  p  log( log xi )
i 1
n

n

  log(  log xi )  (  1)  log xi .
i 1

i 1

The first and second order derivatives of the log-likelihood function are:
n
l n(2  p)
n


  log xi


1  p   i 1
n
l
n
1


 1  p   i 1   log xi
n
l
 / (1  p)
n
 n log   n

  log[log[1 / xi ]]
p
(1  p ) 1  p   i 1

 2l  n ( 2  p )
n2
n[(2  p)(1  p   ) 2  2 2 ]




 2
2
(1  p   ) 2
 2 (1  p   ) 2
n
 2l
n 2
1




2
2
2

(1  p   )
i 1 (  log xi )

2

  / (1  p ) 
 2l
 // (1  p )

n

n


p 2
 (1  p)
 (1  p ) 
 2l
n
n


2
  (1  p   ) 1  p  
 2l
n
n
 
p   (1  p   ) 2
 2l
n

p 
(1  p   ) 2
For information matrix we obtain the following result

13

r
p
n

 p  1 
1
 2 p e 
p


E 


 ( ) (r ,  ) .

2


 i 1 (  log xi )  (1  p)[1  p   ] r 0  r   

For p  0 , this reduces to the result given in Gomez et al. (2014).
The information matrix is given by

 n[( 2  p)(1  p   ) 2  2 2 ]

 2 (1  p   ) 2














n
(1  p   ) 2

n
1  p  



p  p 1
 2 p e 


  r   ( ) p (r ,  )
 (1  p)[1  p   ] r  0    


r

n 2
(1  p   )



2










//
 (1  p) 
n
 (1  p ) 


n
n

 (1  p   ) 2
n 2

(1  p   ) 2
  / (1  p) 
 n

  (1  p) 

2

This matrix can be inverted to get asymptotic variance-covariance matrix for the
maximum likelihood estimates.
5. Numerical Applications
In this section, for the purpose of application with the LL p  ,   regression model, reparameterization of the distribution is required. The LL p  ,   will be re-parameterized
in terms of its mean,  in (14) together with two other new parameters  and  such
that the parameters in (4) are replaced by:



 (2   )   2 2 2  4 (1   )
log 
1  p 
,p
,  

2(1   )(1   )
log(1   )  
1 

The new parameters are such that 0 <  < 1,  > 0, 1    1  . The LL p ( ,  ) will
now be denoted in terms of the new parameters as LL ( ,  ) . When γ = 1, the reparameterized log-Lindley distribution of Gomez et al. (2014) is obtained.
Suppose that a random sample Y1 , Y2 ,  , Yn of size n is obtained from the
LL  ,   distribution. For a set of k covariates, the logit link for the LL ( ,  )

regression model gives the mean for each Yi as

14

i 
where

xTi  1, xi1 ,  , xik 

are

exp( x Ti β )
1  exp( x Ti β)
the

, i  1, 2,  , n

covariates

with

corresponding

coefficients

β   0 , 1 ,  ,  k  .
Here, the beta, LL and LL ( ,  ) regression models are applied on the data set
originally used in Schmit and Roth (1990) and considered in Gomez-Deniz et al. (2014)
about the cost effectiveness of risk management (measured in percentages) in relation to
exposure to certain property and casualty losses, adjusted by several other variables such
as size of assets and industry risk. Description on the data set may be found in GomezDeniz et al. (2014). We take the response variable to be Y = FIRMCOST/100. Six other
variables (covariates) are ASSUME (X1), CAP (X2), SIZELOG (X3), INDCOST (X4),
CENTRAL (X5) and SOPH (X6). Similar to the analysis on the same data set by Jodra and
Jimenez-Gamero (2016), which used a different re-parameterization of the Log-Lindley
distribution, we investigated the cases of y and 1 – y with and without covariates.
Analysis was performed using the R packages. Beta regression is performed using
the package betareg, while LL and LL ( ,  ) regressions are performed through
optimization using the function mle2 under the package bbmle. The log-likelihood values
and parameter estimates for the models considered, with and without covariates, are
presented in Table 1.

15

Table 1. Log-likelihood values and parameter estimates for beta, Log-Lindley and
generalized Log-Lindley models, with and without covariates
Y

1–Y

Models
Log-likelihood

Estimates

Log-likelihood

Estimates

a = 0.6125

76.1175

a = 3.7979

(a) Without covariates
Beta(a,b)

76.1175

b = 3.7979
Log-Lindley,

76.6042

LL
Generalized

 = 0.03427

b = 0.61252
69.0196

 = 0.6907
83.2511

Log-Lindley,

 = 0.3824

 = 4.16×103
 = 5.9076

69.0195

 = 2.66×103

 = 1.2694

 = 5.9077

p = 1.7819

p = 1.0×10-6

LL p ( ,  )
(b) With covariates and logit link for regression
Beta (  ,  )

Log-Lindley,

LL1 (  ,  )

87.7230

83.7575

 0 = 1.8880

87.7230

 0 = -1.8880

1 = -0.01214

1 = 0.01214

 2 = 0.1780

 2 = -0.1780

 3 = -0.5115

 3 = 0.5115

 4 = 1.2363

 4 = -1.2363

 5 = -0.01216

 5 = 0.01216

 6 = -0.003721

 6 = 0.003721

 = 6.331

 = 6.331

 0 = 1.6767

1 = -7.57×10-3

16

96.7689

 0 = -2.7200

1 = 0.03208

Generalized

91.9525

 2 = 0.08903

 2 = -0.7378

 3 = -0.4281

 3 = 0.7024

 4 = 0.9687

 4 = -3.7854

 5 = -0.02318

 5 = 6.86×10-3

 6 = 2.91×10-4

 6 = 0.03593

 = 0.03488

 = 67.212

 0 = 0.2175

96.8252

 0 = -2.7149

Log-Lindley,

LL ( ,  )

1 = 0.004907

1 = 0.03221

 2 = -0.1335

 2 = -0.7508

 3 = -0.2644

 3 = 0.7049

 4 = 0.4451

 4 = -3.7945

 5 = -0.07726

 5 = 0.002473

 6 = 0.005268

 6 = 0.03570

 = 0.1755

 = 65.0001

γ = 2.6735

γ = 1.0021

In terms of the log-likelihood values, it is clear from the results in Table 1 that the
generalized Log-Lindley model fits the data best with or without covariates for the
response variable y. It is also the best model for the regression of 1 – Y, while the beta
model is the best for this case without covariates. For the case of modeling 1 – Y without
covariates, it is seen that the estimates for the parameter p of the LL p  ,   model
approaches 0 and hence, approaches the results for the LL distribution. Similarly for the
regression of 1 – Y with covariates, the estimates of the parameter γ for the LL  ,  
model approaches 1 and hence, the results approach that of the LL regression model.

17

6. Conclusion
A generalized Log-Lindley distribution has been investigated with important
properties such as the pdf, cdf, survival function and hazard rate function derived.
Application to a real life data set shows the relevance of the newly proposed distribution
in regression modeling. The proposed distribution nests the Log Lindley distribution
proposed by Gomez-Deniz et al. (2014) and offers compact expression for cdf and
moments.

References
1. G´omez−D´eniz, E, Sordo, M.A. and Calder´in−Ojeda, E (2014). The LogLindley distribution as an alternative to the beta regression model with
applications in insurance, Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, 54, 49-57.
2. Jodra, P. and Jimenez-Gamero, M.D. (2016). A note on the Log-Lindley
distribution, Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, 71, 189-194.
3. Jones, M.C. (2009). Kumaraswamy’s distribution: a beta-type distribution with
some tractability advantages, Statistical Methodology, 6, 70-81.
4. Nadaraja, S. (2005) Exponentiated Beta Distribution -, Computers and
Mathematics with Application, 49, 1029-1035
5. Schmit, J.T., Roth, K. (1990). Cost effectiveness of risk managements practice.
The Journal of Risk and Insurance 57 (3), 455–470.
6. Wang, S. (1995). Insurance pricing and increased limits rate making by
proportional hazards transformations, Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, 17,
43-54.
7. Wang, S. (1996). Premium calculation by transforming the layer premium
density, Astin Bulletin, 26 (1), 71-92.
8. Zakerzadeh, H., Dolati, A., 2010. Generalized Lindley distribution. Journal of
Mathematical Extension 3 (2), 13–25.

18

