author:
- 'Moshe Adrian, Eric T. Bradlow, Peter S. Fader, and Blake McShane[^1]'
title: '**[Count Models Based on Weibull Interarrival Times]{}**'
---

epsf =6.5in =.23in =.23in

Introduction {#intro}
============

-   [[*Quote 1: Although the Weibull distribution is preferred in duration analysis for its closed-form hazard function,....*]{}]{}

-   [[*Quote 2: For noninteger $\alpha$, no closed-form expression is available for the Gamma (counting) model...*]{}]{}

-   [[*Quote 3: The regression is for waiting times and not directly for counts... hence the estimated parameters have to be interpreted (carefully and) accordingly.*]{}]{}

-   [Winkelmann (1995)]{}

The ubiquitity of count data, and the use of models for analyzing it, makes (by definition) significant advances in their analysis a “big deal”. The above quotes, taken from Winkelmann’s (1995) paper and echoed in Winkelmann (2003), suggests the need for research into count data models well beyond that which is currently available.

In particular, quote 1 suggests and calls for the development of a count model based upon a flexible family of arrival curves (e.g. the Weibull), in contrast to the commonly employed Poisson and Negative-Binomial models that are based upon a more restrictive underlying exponential timing process. As is well-known, if for no other reason (although as we show there are many more), the constant (decreasing) hazard function of the exponential (exponential with gamma heterogeneity) leads to a counting model where the variance is equal (greater than or equal to) the mean (Barlow and Proschan, 1965). That is, underdispersed count data (Cameron and Johansson, 1997; Trivedi and Deb, 1997, Cameron and Trivedi, 1996, King, 1989) that has been shown to exist in many domains is entirely left to “fend for itself”. On the other hand, if derivable, the Weibull counting model which allows for decreasing, constant, or increasing hazard (as the shape parameter is greater than, equal to, or less than 1 respectively), does not suffer this limitation.

However, by no means has this problem gone
author: 
 -' Moshe Adrian, Eric T. Bradlow, Peter S. Fader, and Blake McShane[^1 ]' 
 title:' * * [ Count Models Based on Weibull Interarrival Times ] { } * *' 
 --- 

 epsf = 6.5 in = .23 in = .23 in 

 Introduction { # presentation } 
 = = = = = = = = = = = = 

 -    [ [ * Quote 1: Although the Weibull distribution is prefer in duration analysis for its closed - human body luck function, .... * ] { } ] { } 

 -    [ [ * Quote 2: For noninteger $ \alpha$, no closed - form saying is available for the Gamma (counting) model... * ] { } ] { } 

 -    [ [ * Quote 3: The arrested development is for expect times and not immediately for counts... hence the estimated parameters accept to be interpreted (carefully and) accordingly. * ] { } ] { } 

 -    [ Winkelmann (1995) ] { } 

 The ubiquitity of count data, and the use of model for analyzing it, makes (by definition) significant progress in their analysis a “ big deal ”. The above quotes, remove from Winkelmann ’s (1995) paper and echoed in Winkelmann (2003), suggests the need for research into count datum models well beyond that which is currently available. 

 In particular, quote 1 suggests and calls for the development of a count exemplar based upon a flexible family of arrival curves (e.g. the Weibull), in contrast to the commonly employed Poisson and Negative - Binomial models that are based upon a more restrictive underlie exponential timing process. As is well - known, if for no early rationality (although as we picture there are many more), the constant (decreasing) hazard function of the exponential (exponential with gamma heterogeneity) leads to a counting exemplar where the variance is equal (greater than or equal to) the mean (Barlow and Proschan, 1965). That is, underdispersed count data (Cameron and Johansson, 1997; Trivedi and Deb, 1997, Cameron and Trivedi, 1996, King, 1989) that has been testify to exist in many domains is entirely left to “ fend for itself ”. On the other hand, if derivable, the Weibull count exemplar which allows for decreasing, constant, or increasing luck (as the shape parameter is greater than, equal to, or less than 1 respectively), does not suffer this limitation. 

 However, by no means has this problem gone
autjor:
- 'Moshe Adrian, Eric T. Nradlow, Peter S. Yqder, aid Blaks McShand[^1]'
title: '**[Count Models Based on Wwibulo Interarrival Times]{}**'
---

eprf =6.5in =.23in =.23pn

Introduxtioi {#intro}
============

-   [[*Quote 1: Althougm the Aeibblo distribution is prefersed in duratiot xnclysis for its closed-form hazard funstion,....*]{}]{}

-   [[*Qkote 2: For nonigtegtr $\wlphz$, no closed-form expression is avaimable fmr the Gamma (vounting) model...*]{}]{}

-   [[*Quote 3: Thf rehression is for walting times and bot directly for counts... hence the gstimated parameters have to be knter'reted (careduoly dnd) accordiigly.*]{}]{}

-   [Winkelmann (1995)]{}

Bne ubixuitity of count data, anv thw use of models for aialyzing it, makes (by definitimn) significant advabcws in thehr avqlyris a “bjg deap”. Tie above quktes, taken drom Winkelmann’s (1995) pspqg and echoed jn Winhejmann (2003), suggests the need for research itto count data models well beyond that which is currentlr available.

In particular, quote 1 suggests and callv for ghe dcvelupmfnt of a count model based upon a flexible faijlu pf arrival curyes (e.g. the Weibull), ij vjntrast to thg commoumy employed Poisson wnd Negwtive-Vinomial iodeks that are based upon a moee restrictine ubderlying exponentnal timing pxocess. As ix well-known, if for no ocher rsason (althokgh as we rhow there are mxny mmre), the constant (decreasind) hazard hunctnon of tfe ecponeneial (exponfntial with gamma heteroheneijy) leags to a coknting model where the variance is equal (greajer thdn or eqbal to) the mean (Barjow and Proschcn, 1965). That is, uvderdisperaed couit data (Camewon and Johanvdon, 1997; Trivedi and Deb, 1997, Canerob and Tfkvedi, 1996, King, 1989) tnat has bveu shown ti exist in many dokaiva is entirely lzyt to “fend for itxelw”. Og nhe oever hand, if gerixabur, the Weibull comntkng kodel which allows fmr dscreasing, constant, ov increasung hazawd (as the shale parameter is grtater vhan, edual yo, jr less than 1 respectively), doea not sufver this limitaeion.

Moweder, by no keans has this problem gone
author: - 'Moshe Adrian, Eric T. Bradlow, Fader, Blake McShane[^1]' '**[Count Models Based epsf =.23in =.23in Introduction ============ - [[*Quote Although the Weibull distribution is preferred duration analysis for its closed-form hazard function,....*]{}]{} - [[*Quote 2: For noninteger $\alpha$, closed-form expression is available for the Gamma (counting) model...*]{}]{} - [[*Quote 3: The is waiting and directly for counts... hence the estimated parameters have to be interpreted (carefully and) accordingly.*]{}]{} - [Winkelmann The ubiquitity of count data, and the use models for analyzing it, (by definition) significant advances in analysis “big deal”. above taken Winkelmann’s (1995) paper echoed in Winkelmann (2003), suggests the need for research into count data models well beyond that which currently available. quote 1 and for development of a based upon a flexible family of the Weibull), in contrast to the commonly employed and Negative-Binomial that are based upon a more underlying exponential timing process. As is well-known, if no other reason (although as we show there are many more), the constant (decreasing) hazard the exponential (exponential with heterogeneity) leads to counting where variance equal (greater or equal to) the mean (Barlow and Proschan, 1965). That is, count data (Cameron and Johansson, 1997; Trivedi and Deb, 1997, Trivedi, King, 1989) that been shown to exist many is entirely left to itself”. the derivable, Weibull model which allows for constant, or increasing hazard (as shape parameter is greater than 1 respectively), does not suffer this limitation. by no means has this problem gone
author:
- 'Moshe Adrian, Eric T. BraDlow, Peter S. fader, And blaKe mcShAne[^1]'
tItle: '**[Count ModelS baseD on Weibull Interarrival times]{}**'
---

EpSF =6.5in =.23iN =.23In

introDuction {#INtRO}
============

-   [[*quoTe 1: alThoUgH ThE WeibUll DistribUtion is preFerReD in duration aNAlYsis for its CloSed-form hazarD fuNction,....*]{}]{}

-   [[*quOte 2: fOr nonIntEger $\aLpha$, no CLosed-fOrm expresSiON is avaILable foR THe gammA (counting) model...*]{}]{}

-   [[*QuoTE 3: THE regression is fOr waitInG TiMES anD noT directly fOr CountS... Hence thE EsTIMAteD Parameters havE to be interpREteD (carefUlLy aND) accorDinglY.*]{}]{}

-   [WINkeLmann (1995)]{}

The ubiQuitIty of counT data, aND the use OF models For anaLyzIng It, maKEs (By DefInITioN) SiGniFIcaNt advancEs In Their AnalYSIS A “big DeaL”. The Above Quotes, taken frOm WInkeLManN’s (1995) papEr and EchoEd In WinKelmanN (2003), suggEsTs the need for resEarcH into counT daTa ModElS well BEyond tHat WhiCh is curRently aVAilAbLE.

iN pArticular, quote 1 suggEsTS AnD calls foR the deVElOpMEnt of a coUnT moDel bASEd upoN a flEXiBle familY of arrIVaL cUrves (e.g. ThE WeibuLl), In cOntRast tO The cOmmonlY employeD PoisSOn and Negative-BINomial models tHAt ARE bASed uPon A more restriCtivE UndeRlyiNG eXpoNEntiaL timiNg PRoCEss. As is well-known, if fOr No otheR reasOn (although as wE show there ARE Many more), The cONsTAnt (decreasing) hAzard Function of THe exponeNtial (ExponentIal with gaMMA heterogEneIty) LeaDs tO A CoUnting model whERE the VaRiance iS eqUal (greaTer ThaN or EquAl To) the mean (barlow anD PRoScHaN, 1965). ThAt is, uNDerdispeRsEd cOuNt dAta (CaMEron anD JohaNssoN, 1997; TRiVEdi And Deb, 1997, CAMeRON and trIvEdi, 1996, KIng, 1989) ThAt has Been SHowN to exisT in many doMaiNS is eNtIrEly left To “fend for itseLf”. on the other HaNd, iF derivABLe, the WeiBull counting model which aLLows for DecReasiNg, coNstant, or iNcrEasing HazARd (as thE shape ParamEtEr iS GReateR THaN, eqUaL to, or less tHAN 1 reSpectIvEly), dOes not sUffer this limitatioN.

howEver, by no means Has This PRObLem GOnE
author:
- 'Moshe Adrian, E ric T. Bra dlow,  Pe ter  S . Fa der,  and Blake McS h ane[ ^1]'
title: '**[CountModel sB ased on  Weib ull Int e ra r r iva lTi mes ]{ } ** '
--- 

e psf =6. 5in =.23in  =. 23 in

Introduc t io n {#intro} 
== ==========
-  [[*Qu ot e 1 :  Alth oug h the  Weibu l l dist ributionis prefer r ed in d u r at ionanalysis for itsc lo s ed-form hazard  funct io n ,. . . .*] {}] {}

-   [[ *Q uote2 : For n o ni n t e ger $\alpha$, noclosed-form exp ressio nisa vailab le fo rt heGamma (coun ting ) model.. .*]{}] { }

-  [ [*Quote  3: Th e r egr essi o nis  fo rw ait i ng  ti m esand notdi re ctlyforc o u n ts.. . h ence  theestimated par ame ters hav e tobe in terp re ted ( carefu lly a nd ) accordingly.* ]{}] {}

-   [ Win ke lma nn  (199 5 )]{}
The  ub iquitit y of co u ntda t a ,  a nd the use of mode ls f or  analyzi ng it, ma ke s  (by def in iti on)s i gnifi cant ad vances i n thei r  a na lysis a  “ big de al ”.The  abov e  quo tes, t aken fro m Win k elmann’s (1995 )  paper and ec h oe d in Wink elm ann (2003),  sug g ests  the ne edf or re searc hi nt o  count data modelswe ll bey ond t hat which iscurrentlya v a ilable.
Inp ar t icular, quote1 sug gests andc alls for  thedevelopm ent of ac o unt mode l b ase d u pon a  f lexible famil y of a rr ival cu rve s (e.g.  th e W eib ull ),  in contr ast to t he  c om mo nly  empl o yed Pois so n a nd  Ne gativ e -Binom ial m odel sth a t a re base d  u p o n amo re  res tri ct ive u nder l yin g expon ential ti min g  pro ce ss . As is  well-known,if  for no ot he r r eason( a lthoughas we show there are ma n y more) , t he co nsta nt (decre asi ng) ha zar d  funct ion of  theex pon e n tial( e xp one nt ial with g a m maheter og enei ty) lea ds to a counting m o del  where the va ria ncei s  e qua l  ( g rea te r  th a n  or equal to) t he mean (B ar l ow  and Prosc h an,  1 965). T hat is,  unde r dispers ed countdata (Cam er on a n d  Jo hansson, 1 997; Tri vedi andD eb, 1 9 97 , Cam ero n andTr ive di, 1 996, K i ng,  1989 ) that  h as bee n sho wn  to exis t in many domains is en tirely  left  to  “fend fo r i t sel f”. On th e ot her hand,ifder ivabl e,t he We ibul l  c oun t ing m odel which all o ws  fo r de creasing, c o n s tan t, or  in c reasin g ha zard (as the shap e  parameter isgrea t e r t han ,  equ al  to, or less t han  1 r espectiv el y), does no t suffer  t h is li mitati on.

H owever, b yn o mean s ha s t his probl emgo n e
author:
- 'Moshe_Adrian, Eric_T. Bradlow, Peter S._Fader, and_Blake_McShane[^1]'
title: '**[Count_Models_Based on Weibull_Interarrival Times]{}**'
---

epsf =6.5in_=.23in =.23in

Introduction {#intro}
============

- _ [[*Quote 1:_Although_the Weibull distribution is preferred in duration analysis for its closed-form hazard function,....*]{}]{}

- __[[*Quote 2:_For_noninteger_$\alpha$, no closed-form expression is_available for the Gamma (counting)_model...*]{}]{}

- _ [[*Quote 3: The regression is for waiting_times_and not directly_for counts... hence the estimated parameters have to be_interpreted (carefully and) accordingly.*]{}]{}

-  _[Winkelmann (1995)]{}

The ubiquitity_of_count_data, and the use_of models for analyzing it, makes_(by definition) significant advances in their_analysis a “big deal”. The above quotes,_taken from Winkelmann’s (1995) paper and_echoed in Winkelmann (2003), suggests_the need_for research into count data_models well beyond_that which_is currently available.

In_particular, quote 1 suggests and calls_for the development_of a count model based upon_a_flexible family of_arrival_curves_(e.g. the_Weibull), in contrast_to_the commonly_employed_Poisson and Negative-Binomial models that are_based_upon a more restrictive underlying exponential timing_process. As is well-known,_if_for no other reason_(although as we show there_are many more), the constant (decreasing)_hazard function_of the_exponential (exponential with gamma heterogeneity) leads to a counting model where_the variance is equal (greater than_or equal to) the_mean (Barlow_and_Proschan, 1965). That_is,_underdispersed count_data (Cameron and Johansson, 1997; Trivedi and_Deb, 1997,_Cameron and Trivedi, 1996, King, 1989)_that has been shown_to_exist in many domains is entirely_left to “fend for itself”. On_the other hand, if derivable,_the_Weibull_counting model which allows for_decreasing, constant, or increasing hazard (as_the shape parameter_is greater than, equal to, or less_than_1 respectively), does not suffer this_limitation.

However,_by no means has this problem_gone