Abstract

This paper introduces the Tukey family of symmetric and asymmetric -distributions in the contexts of univariate 𝐿-moments and the 𝐿-correlation. Included is the development of a procedure for specifying nonnormal distributions with controlled degrees of 𝐿-skew, 𝐿-kurtosis, and 𝐿-correlations. The procedure can be applied in a variety of settings such as modeling events (e.g., risk analysis, extreme events) and Monte Carlo or simulation studies. Further, it is demonstrated that estimates of 𝐿-skew, 𝐿-kurtosis, and 𝐿-correlation are substantially superior to conventional product-moment estimates of skew, kurtosis, and Pearson correlation in terms of both relative bias and efficiency when heavy-tailed distributions are of concern.

1. Introduction

The conventional moment-based Tukey families of (or the 𝑔-and- and Generalized Pareto) distributions (e.g., [13]) are often used in various applied mathematics contexts. Some examples include modeling events associated with operational risk [4], extreme oceanic wind speeds, [5], common stock returns [6], solar flare data [7], or in the context of Monte Carlo or simulation studies, for example, regression analysis [8].

The family of -distributions is based on the transformation𝑞(𝑍)=𝑍exp𝑍22,(1.1) where 𝑍𝑖.𝑖.𝑑.  𝑁(0,1). Equation (1.1) produces symmetric -distributions where the parameter controls the tail weight or elongation of any particular distribution and is positively related with kurtosis. The pdf and cdf associated with (1.1) are expressed as in [3, equations (12), (13)] 𝑓𝑞(𝑍)(𝑞(𝑧))=𝑓(𝑧)=𝑞(𝑧),𝜙(𝑧)𝑞,(𝑧)(1.2)𝐹𝑞(𝑍)(𝑞(𝑧))=𝐹(𝑧)=(𝑞(𝑧),Φ(𝑧)),(1.3) where 𝑓2 and 𝐹2 are the parametric forms of the pdf and cdf with the mappings 𝑧(𝑥,𝑦) and 𝑧(𝑥,𝑣) with 𝑥=𝑞(𝑧), 𝑦=𝜙(𝑧)/𝑞(𝑧), 𝑣=Φ(𝑧), and where 𝜙(𝑧) and Φ(𝑧) are the standard normal pdf and cdf, respectively. It is assumed that 𝑞(𝑧)>0 in (1.2) to ensure a valid pdf, that is, the transformation in (1.1) is strictly increasing, which requires 0. Further, if 𝑞(𝑍) in (1.1) has a valid pdf where the 𝑘-th order moment exists (for 𝑘=1,2,), then must be bounded such that 0<1/𝑘. That is, a distribution will not have a first moment (or mean) for 1 [2, 3].

The variance (𝛼22) and kurtosis (𝛼4) of a distribution associated with (1.1) can be determined from [3, Equations (32), (36)] 𝛼22=1(12)3/2,𝛼4=3(12)31(14)5/2+1(21)3,(1.4) where the mean (𝛼1) and skew (𝛼3) of a distribution are both zero.

One of the extensions of (1.1)–(1.3) is the two parameter family of distributions introduced by Morgenthaler and Tukey [2]. More specifically, the family includes asymmetric distributions with heavy tails based on the transformation 𝑞(𝑍)=𝑍exp𝑍22,for𝑍0,𝑍exp𝑍22,for𝑍0,(1.5) where () is the parameter for the left (right) tail of a distribution. The properties of the transformation in (1.5) are the same as those associated with (1.1). However, the tails of distributions have to be considered separately as they are weighted differently that is, in general, . For example, Figure 1 gives an example of an -distribution based on matching the values of 𝛼3 and 𝛼4 associated with a noncentral Student 𝑡(df=5,𝛿=1) distribution. The values of and in Figure 1 were computed by simultaneously solving (A.3) and (A.4) in the appendix.

Conventional moment-based-estimators (e.g., 𝛼3, 𝛼4) have unfavorable attributes insofar as they can be substantially biased, have high variance, or can be influenced by outliers. For example, inspection of Figure 1 indicates, on average, that the estimates of 𝛼3 and 𝛼4 are only 78.83% and 42.81% of their associated population parameters. Note that each estimate of 𝛼3 and 𝛼4 in Figure 1 were calculated based on sample sizes of 𝑛=250 and the formulae currently used by most commercial software packages such as SAS, SPSS, and Minitab for computing skew and kurtosis.

However, 𝐿-moment-based estimators such as 𝐿-skew and 𝐿-kurtosis have been introduced to address some of the limitations associated with conventional estimates of skew and kurtosis [9, 10]. Specifically, some of the advantages that 𝐿-moments (or their estimators) have over conventional moments are that they (a) exist whenever the mean of the distribution exists, (b) are nearly unbiased for all sample sizes and distributions, and (c) are more robust in the presence of outliers. For example, the estimates ̂𝜏3 and ̂𝜏4 in Figure 1 are relatively much closer to their respective parameters with much smaller standard errors than their corresponding conventional moment based analogs (𝛼3, 𝛼4). More specifically, the estimates of ̂𝜏3 and ̂𝜏4 that were simulated are, on average, 98.74% and 99.64% of their parameters.

In the context of multivariate data generation, the methodology has been developed for simulating -(or 𝑔-and-) distributions with specified Pearson correlation structures [11, pages 140–148] [12]. This methodology is based on conventional product moments and the popular NORTA [13] approach, which begins with generating multivariate standard normal deviates. However, the NORTA approach is not without its limitations. Specifically, one limitation arises because the Pearson correlation is not invariant under nonlinear strictly increasing transformations such as (1.1). As such, the NORTA approach must begin with the computation of an intermediate correlation (IC) matrix, which is different than the specified correlation matrix between the nonnormal -distributions. The purpose of the IC matrix is to adjust for the nonnormalization effect of the transformation in (1.1) such that the resulting nonnormal distributions have their specified skew, kurtosis, and specified correlation matrix.

Some additional consequences associated with NORTA in this context are that it (a) requires numerical integration to compute solutions to ICs between -distributions—unlike the more popular power method [11] which has a straight-forward equation to solve for the ICs between distributions [11, page 30] and (b) may yield solutions to ICs that are not in the range of [1,+1] as the absolute values of ICs must be greater than (or equal to) their specified Pearson correlations [14]. Further, these two problems which can be exacerbated when -distributions with heavy tails are used as functions performing numerical integration will more frequently either fail to converge or yield incorrect solutions to ICs.

In view of the above, the present aim is to derive the and families of distributions in the contexts of 𝐿-moment and 𝐿-correlation theory. Specifically, the purpose of this paper is to develop the methodology and a procedure for simulating nonnormal symmetric and asymmetric distributions with specified 𝐿-moments and 𝐿-correlations. Some of the advantages of the proposed procedure are that ICs (a) can be solved directly with a single equation, that is, numerical integration is not required and (b) cannot exist outside the range of [1,+1] as it is shown that the absolute value of an IC will be less than (or equal to) its associated specified 𝐿-correlation.

The remainder of the paper is outlined as follows. In Section 2, a summary of univariate 𝐿-moment theory is provided and the derivations of the systems of equations for the and distributions are provided for modeling or simulating nonnormal distributions with specified values of 𝐿-skew and 𝐿-kurtosis. In Section 3, the coefficient of 𝐿-correlation is introduced and the equations are subsequently derived for determining ICs for specified 𝐿-correlations between nonnormal or distributions. In Section 4, the steps for implementing the proposed 𝐿-moment procedure are described. A numerical example and results of a simulation are also provided to confirm the derivations and compare the new procedure with the traditional or conventional moment-based procedure. In Section 5, the results of the simulation are discussed.

2. Methodology

2.1. Preliminaries

Let 𝑋1,,𝑋𝑗,,𝑋𝑛 be 𝑖𝑖𝑑 random variables each with continuous pdf 𝑓(𝑥), cdf 𝐹(𝑥), order statistics denoted as 𝑋1𝑛𝑋𝑗𝑛𝑋𝑛𝑛, and 𝐿-moments defined in terms of either linear combinations of (a) expectations of order statistics or (b) probability-weighted moments (𝛽𝑖). For the purposes considered herein, the first four 𝐿-moments associated with 𝑋𝑗𝑛 are expressed as [10, pages 20–22] 𝜆1𝑋=𝐸11=𝛽0,𝜆2=12𝐸𝑋22𝑋12=2𝛽1𝛽0,(2.1)𝜆3=13𝐸𝑋332𝑋23+𝑋13=6𝛽26𝛽1+𝛽0,(2.2)𝜆4=14𝐸𝑋443𝑋34+3𝑋24𝑋14=20𝛽330𝛽2+12𝛽1𝛽0,(2.3) where the 𝛽𝑖 are determined from 𝛽𝑖=𝑥{𝐹(𝑥)}𝑖𝑓(𝑥)𝑑𝑥,(2.4) where 𝑖=0,,3. The coefficients associated with 𝛽𝑖 in (2.4) are obtained from shifted orthogonal Legendre polynomials and are computed as shown in [10, page 20] or in [15].

The 𝐿-moments 𝜆1 and 𝜆2 in (2.1) are measures of location and scale and are the arithmetic mean and one-half the coefficient of mean difference (or Gini’s index of spread), respectively. Higher-order 𝐿-moments are transformed to dimensionless quantities referred to as 𝐿-moment ratios defined as 𝜏𝑟=𝜆𝑟/𝜆2 for 𝑟3, and where 𝜏3 and 𝜏4 are the analogs to the conventional measures of skew and kurtosis. In general, 𝐿-moment ratios are bounded in the interval 1<𝜏𝑟<1 as is the index of 𝐿-skew (𝜏3) where a symmetric distribution implies that all 𝐿-moment ratios with odd subscripts are zero. Other smaller boundaries can be found for more specific cases. For example, the index of 𝐿-kurtosis (𝜏4) has the boundary condition for continuous distributions of [16] 5𝜏2314<𝜏4<1.(2.5)

2.2. 𝐿-Moments for Symmetric -Distributions

The family of -distributions based on the method of 𝐿-moments is less restrictive than the family based on conventional method of moments as described in the previous section to the extent that we may consider the parameter on the interval 0<1 for any distribution with finite 𝑘-order 𝐿-moments rather than 0<1/𝑘 for the 𝑘th-order conventional moment to exist. This advantage is attributed to Hosking’s Theorem 1 [9] which states that if the mean (𝜆1) exists, then all other 𝐿-moments will have finite expectations.

We begin the derivation for symmetric -distributions in the context of 𝐿-moments by defining the probability-weighted moments based on (2.4) in terms of 𝑞(𝑧) in (1.1) and the standard normal pdf and cdf as 𝛽𝑖=+𝑞(𝑧){Φ(𝑧)}𝑖𝜙(𝑧)𝑑𝑧.(2.6) Integrating (2.6) for 𝑖=0,1,2 gives 𝜆1,=0(2.7)𝜆2=2𝜋(1),2(2.8)𝜆3=𝜏3=0.(2.9)

The fourth 𝐿-moment 𝜆4 (and 𝜏4) is subsequently derived in terms of the expectations of order statistics as in (2.3) by making use of the following expression for standard normal-based expectations and for 𝑛=4 as [17]𝐸𝑞(𝑍)𝑗4=143𝑗10[]𝑞(𝑧)𝜑(𝑧)1+Ψ(𝑧)𝑗1[]1Ψ(𝑧)4𝑗[]1Ψ(𝑧)𝑗1[]1+Ψ(𝑧)4𝑗𝑑𝑧,(2.10) where 𝜑(𝑧)=2𝜙(𝑧) and Ψ(𝑧)=2Φ(𝑧)1 are the pdf and cdf of the folded unit normal distribution at 𝑧=0, respectively. The relevant expansions of the polynomial in (2.10) are 𝐸𝑞(𝑍)34=𝐸𝑞(𝑍)24=32𝐼1𝐼3,𝐸𝑞(𝑍)44=𝐸𝑞(𝑍)14=123𝐼1+𝐼3,(2.11) where the expectations in (2.11) is linear combinations associated with the integrals denoted as 𝐼1 and 𝐼3. The specific expressions for 𝐼1 and 𝐼3 are 𝐼1=𝛿𝜆2=(1)122𝜋(1)=12𝜋,(2.12)𝐼3=0[]𝑞(𝑧)𝜑(𝑧)Ψ(𝑧)3𝑑𝑧,(2.13) where it is convenient to use 𝛿 in (2.12) to standardize 𝐼1 (𝜆2) to the unit normal distribution. Equation (2.13) may be integrated by parts based on Ψ(𝑧)=𝜑(𝑧), 𝜑(𝑧)=𝜑(𝑧)𝑧, and noting that Ψ(0)=0 and lim𝑧+𝜑(𝑧)=0. As such, we have 𝐼3=30[]𝜉(𝑧)𝜑(𝑧)Ψ(𝑧)2𝑑𝑧,(2.14) where the expression 𝜉(𝑧) is 𝜉(𝑧)=𝛿𝑞(𝑧)𝜑(𝑧)𝑑𝑧=exp(1/2)(1)𝑧22𝜋.(2.15) Let us first consider the expression [Ψ(𝑧)]2 in (2.14), which can be expressed as []Ψ(𝑧)2=2𝜋𝑧01exp2𝑢2𝑑𝑢2=2𝜋𝑧01exp2𝑧21+𝑧22𝑑𝑧1𝑑𝑧24=1𝜋0𝜋/41exp2𝑧2sec2𝜃1𝑑𝜃1.(2.16) Substituting (2.16) into (2.14) and, using Lichtenstein’s Theorem [18], and integrating first with respect to 𝑧 yield 𝜋0𝜉(𝑧)𝜑(𝑧)21exp2𝑧2sec2𝜃1𝑑𝑧=4222+sec2𝜃1.(2.17) Using (2.17), the integral in (2.14) is expressed as 𝐼3=3𝜋41𝜋0𝜋/44222+sec2𝜃1𝑑𝜃1=3𝜋12tan1(4/2)1/2𝜋3/2.(2.18) Hence, using (2.3) and (2.11) and (2.12), 𝐿-kurtosis can be expressed as 𝜏4=630tan1(4/2)1/2𝜋,(2.19) where 0<1. Whence, it follows that we have a convenient closed formed solution for the parameter as =3sec𝜋𝜏154.6(2.20) Equation (2.19) has a lower limit of 𝜏40.1226(=0) that is equivalent to the normal distribution and an upper limit (𝜏41; 1) that is equivalent to the Cauchy or 𝑡(df=1) distribution. Figure 2(d) gives an example of a symmetric -distribution with𝐿-kurtosis (𝜏4) of a logistic distribution.

2.3. 𝐿-Moments for Asymmetric -Distributions

The derivation of the 𝐿-moments for asymmetric -distributions associated with (1.5) begins with determining the probability-weighted moments 𝛽𝑖 in (2.6) by separately evaluating and summing two integrals as 𝛽𝑖=𝐼𝑖+𝐼𝑖=0𝑞𝑧,{Φ(𝑧)}𝑖𝜙(𝑧)𝑑𝑧+0+𝑞𝑧,{Φ(𝑧)}𝑖𝜙(𝑧)𝑑𝑧.(2.21) As such, using (2.1) and (2.21), it is straight-forward to obtain 𝛽0, 𝛽1, and the first two 𝐿-moments as 𝜆1=12𝜋+112𝜋1,𝜆2=2+2222𝜋112.2(2.22) In terms of deriving 𝜆3 and 𝜆4, it is convenient to consider 𝛽2 in (2.2) as 𝛽2=𝐼2+𝐼2=𝐼2+𝐼2+𝜆22,(2.23) where 𝜆2() can be obtained from (2.8). Thus, it is only necessary to determine 𝐼2() as 𝐼2=0𝑞𝑧,{Φ(𝑧)}2𝜙(𝑧)𝑑𝑧=0𝑧2𝜋exp𝑧122{Φ(𝑧)}2=1𝑑𝑧2𝜋10{Φ(𝑧)}2𝑑exp𝑧122=12𝜋1{Φ(𝑧)}2exp𝑧122|||||0012𝜋exp𝑧222=2Φ(𝑧)𝑑𝑧142𝜋1+22𝜋21022𝜋exp2𝑧22Φ(𝑧)𝑑𝑧.(2.24) If we let 𝑋𝑁(0,1/(2)) and 𝑁(0,1), where 𝑋 and 𝑌 are independent such that (𝑋/2,𝑌) jointly follow the standard bivariate normal distribution, then the integral in the last part of (2.24) is 022𝜋exp2𝑧22=Φ(𝑧)𝑑𝑧Pr={𝑋<0,𝑌<𝑋}Pr𝑋2<0,𝑌<2𝑋2=1421cot12𝜋,(2.25) where we are calculating the proportion of area between the 𝑦-axis and the line 𝑦=𝑥(2) as a sector because the independent standard normal bivariate density has rotational symmetry about the origin. Combining terms from (2.24) and (2.25) yields 𝐼2=14122𝜋221cot12𝜋.1(2.26) Hence, given (2.26) and (2.19), we can solve for 𝛽2, 𝛽3, and subsequently obtain the expressions for 𝐿-skew (𝜏3) and 𝐿-kurtosis (𝜏4) as 𝜏3=12221cot12𝜋2212221cot122𝜋22222+2,𝜏4=6𝜋42122413414212+30142211tan121+4+302411tan121+𝜋4421222+2.(2.27) Thus, given specified values of 𝜏3 and 𝜏4, (2.27) can be numerically solved for the corresponding values of and . Figures 2(a), 2(b) and 2(c) provides some examples of various -distributions, which are used in the simulation portion of this study in Section 4.

3. 𝐿-Correlations for the and -Distributions

The coefficient of 𝐿-correlation (see [19]) is introduced by considering two random variables 𝑌𝑗 and 𝑌𝑘 with distribution functions 𝐹(𝑌𝑗) and 𝐹(𝑌𝑘), respectively. The second 𝐿-moments of 𝑌𝑗 and 𝑌𝑘 can alternatively be expressed as 𝜆2𝑌𝑗=2Cov𝑌𝑗𝑌,𝐹𝑗,(3.1)𝜆2𝑌𝑘=2Cov𝑌𝑘𝑌,𝐹𝑘.(3.2) The second 𝐿-comoments of 𝑌𝑗 toward 𝑌𝑘 and 𝑌𝑘 toward 𝑌𝑗 are 𝜆2𝑌𝑗,𝑌𝑘=2Cov𝑌𝑗𝑌,𝐹𝑘,(3.3)𝜆2𝑌𝑘,𝑌𝑗=2Cov𝑌𝑘𝑌,𝐹𝑗.(3.4) As such, the 𝐿-correlations of 𝑌𝑗 toward 𝑌𝑘 and 𝑌𝑘 toward 𝑌𝑗 are expressed as 𝜂𝑗𝑘=𝜆2𝑌𝑗,𝑌𝑘𝜆2𝑌𝑗,(3.5)𝜂𝑘𝑗=𝜆2𝑌𝑘,𝑌𝑗𝜆2𝑌𝑘.(3.6) The 𝐿-correlation in (3.5) or (3.6) is bounded such that 1𝜂𝑗𝑘1, where a value of 𝜂𝑗𝑘=1 (𝜂𝑗𝑘=1) indicates a strictly increasing (decreasing) monotone relationship between the two variables. In general, we would also note that 𝜂𝑗𝑘𝜂𝑘𝑗.

In the context of 𝐿-moment symmetric -distributions (0<1), suppose it is desired to simulate 𝑇 distributions based on (1.1) with a specified 𝐿-correlation matrix and where each distribution has its own specified value of 𝜏4. Define 𝑞(𝑍𝑗) and 𝑞(𝑍𝑘) as in (1.1), where 𝑍𝑗 and 𝑍𝑘 have Pearson correlation 𝜌𝑗𝑘 and standard normal bivariate density of 𝑓𝑗𝑘=2𝜋1𝜌2𝑗𝑘1/212exp1𝜌2𝑗𝑘1𝑧2𝑗+𝑧2𝑘2𝜌𝑗𝑘𝑧𝑗𝑧𝑘.(3.7) Using (1.1), (1.3), and (3.5) with the denominator standardized to 𝜆2=1/𝜋 for the unit-normal distribution, and (3.7), the 𝐿-correlation of 𝑞(𝑍𝑗) toward 𝑞(𝑍𝑘) can be expressed as 𝜂𝑗𝑘=2𝜋Cov𝑞𝑧𝑗,𝐹𝑞(𝑍𝑘)𝑞𝑧𝑘=2𝜋Cov𝑞𝑧𝑗𝑧,Φ𝑘=2𝑞𝑧𝜋𝐸𝑗Φ𝑧𝑘2𝑞𝑧𝜋𝐸𝑗𝐸Φ𝑧𝑘=2𝜋+𝑧𝛿𝑞𝑗Φ𝑧𝑘𝑓𝑗𝑘𝑑𝑧𝑗𝑑𝑧𝑘2𝑞𝑧𝜋𝐸𝑗𝐸Φ𝑧𝑘,(3.8) where 𝛿 is the standardizing term in (2.12). Integrating (3.8) yields 𝜂𝑗𝑘=𝜌𝑗𝑘2𝑗2+𝑗𝜌2𝑗𝑘2(3.9) given that 𝐸[𝑞(𝑧𝑗)]=0 and 𝐸[Φ(𝑧𝑘)]=1/2. Analogously, the 𝐿-correlation of 𝑞(𝑍𝑘) toward 𝑞(𝑍𝑗) is 𝜂𝑘𝑗=𝜌𝑗𝑘2𝑘2+𝑘𝜌2𝑗𝑘.2(3.10)

From (3.9), the intermediate correlation (IC) 𝜌𝑗𝑘 can be determined by simply evaluating 𝜌𝑗𝑘=±2𝑗𝜂2𝑗𝑘𝜂2𝑗𝑘𝑗𝜂2𝑗𝑘+𝑗2(3.11) for a specified value of 𝜂𝑗𝑘 and a given value of 𝑗 from (2.20). Given 𝜌𝑗𝑘 from (3.11), the 𝐿-correlation 𝜂𝑘𝑗 can be determined by evaluating (3.10) using the solved value of 𝑘. Note the special case of where 𝑗=𝑘, in (3.9) and (3.10), then 𝜂𝑗𝑘=𝜂𝑘𝑗.

Remark 3.1. Inspection of (3.9) indicates that 𝜂𝑗𝑘=𝜌𝑗𝑘 when either (a) 𝑞(𝑍𝑗) is standard normal that is, 𝑗=0, (b) 𝜌𝑗𝑘=0, or (c) 𝜌𝑗𝑘=1.

Remark 3.2. If the IC is such that 0<|𝜌𝑗𝑘|<1 and 0<𝑗<1 in (3.9), then we have the inequality ||𝜌0<𝑗𝑘||<||𝜂𝑗𝑘||<1,(3.12) as from inspecting (3.9) it is evident that [(2𝑗)/(2+𝑗(𝜌2𝑗𝑘2))]1/2>1. Thus, solutions to ICs cannot exist outside the range of [1,+1].
The extension of determining ICs for asymmetric -distributions is analogous to the method described above for -distributions, where (1.5) is standardized and subsequently integrated as in (3.8) to obtain 𝜂𝑗𝑘=12𝜌𝑗𝑘2𝑗2+𝑗𝜌2𝑗𝑘+122𝜌𝑗𝑘2𝑗2+𝑗𝜌2𝑗𝑘,2(3.13)𝜂𝑘𝑗=12𝜌𝑗𝑘2𝑘2+𝑘𝜌2𝑗𝑘+122𝜌𝑗𝑘2𝑘2+𝑘𝜌2𝑗𝑘,2(3.14) where it is straight-forward to see that if 𝑗=𝑗 (or 𝑘=𝑘), then (3.13) or (3.14) simplifies to (3.9) or (3.10) for the case of symmetric -distributions. The IC in (3.13) is determined by substituting the specified 𝐿-correlation (𝜂𝑗𝑘) and the solved values of the parameters 𝑗 and 𝑗 (from (2.27)) into the left- and right-hand sides of (3.13), respectively, and then numerically solving for 𝜌𝑗𝑘. We would also note that Remarks 3.1 and 3.2 also apply to (3.13) and (3.14).

4. The Procedure and Simulation Study

To implement the procedure for simulating - (or -) distributions with specified 𝐿-moments and specified 𝐿-correlations, we suggest the following five steps. (1)Specify the 𝐿-moments for 𝑇 transformations of the form in (1.5), that is, 𝑞(𝑍1),,𝑞(𝑍𝑇)and obtain the parameters of 𝑗 and 𝑗by solving equations (2.27) using the specified values of 𝐿-skew (𝜏3) and 𝐿-kurtosis (𝜏4) for each distribution. Specify a 𝑇×𝑇 matrix of 𝐿-correlations (𝜂𝑗𝑘) for 𝑞(𝑍𝑗) toward 𝑞(𝑍𝑘), where 𝑗<𝑘{1,2,,𝑇}. (2) Compute the (Pearson) intermediate correlations (ICs) 𝜌𝑗𝑘 by substituting the specified 𝐿-correlation 𝜂𝑗𝑘 and the parameters of 𝑗 and 𝑗 from step (1) into the left- and right-hand sides of (3.14), respectively, and then numerically solve for 𝜌𝑗𝑘. Repeat this step separately for all 𝑇(𝑇1)/2 pairwise combinations of correlations. (3) Assemble the ICs into a 𝑇×𝑇 matrix and decompose this matrix using a Cholesky factorization. Note that this step requires the IC matrix to be positive definite. (4) Use the results of the Cholesky factorization from step (3) to generate 𝑇 standard normal variables (𝑍1,,𝑍𝑇) correlated at the intermediate levels as follows: 𝑍1=𝑎11𝑉1,𝑍2=𝑎12𝑉1+𝑎22𝑉2,𝑍𝑗=𝑎1𝑗𝑉1+𝑎2𝑗𝑉2++𝑎𝑖𝑗𝑉𝑖++𝑎𝑗𝑗𝑉𝑗,𝑍𝑇=𝑎1𝑇𝑉1+𝑎2𝑇𝑉2++𝑎𝑖𝑇𝑉𝑖++𝑎𝑗𝑇𝑉𝑗++𝑎𝑇𝑇𝑉𝑇,(4.1) where 𝑉1,,𝑉𝑇 are independent standard normal random variables and where 𝑎𝑖𝑗 represents the element in the 𝑖-th row and the 𝑗-th column of the matrix associated with the Cholesky factorization performed in step (3). (5) Substitute 𝑍1,,𝑍𝑇 from step (4) into 𝑇 equations of the form in (1.5), as noted in step (1), to generate the nonnormal -distributions with the specified 𝐿-moments and 𝐿-correlations.

To demonstrate the steps above and evaluate the proposed procedure, a comparison between the new 𝐿-moment and conventional moment-based procedures is subsequently described. Specifically, the distributions in Figure 2 are used as a basis for a comparison using the specified correlation matrices in Table 1 where both strong and moderate levels of correlation are considered. Tables 2 and 3 give the solved IC matrices for the 𝐿-moment and conventional moment-based procedures, respectively. Note that the ICs for the conventional procedure were computed by adapting the Mathematica source code in [12, Table  1] for (1.5). Tables 4 and 5 give the results of the Cholesky decompositions on the IC matrices, which are then used to create 𝑍1,,𝑍4 with the specified ICs by making use of the formulae given in (4.1) of step 4 with 𝑇=4. The values of 𝑍1,,𝑍4 are subsequently substituted into equations of the form in (1.5) to produce 𝑞(𝑍1),,𝑞(𝑍4) for both procedures.

In terms of the simulation, a Fortran algorithm was written for both procedures to generate 25,000 independent sample estimates for the specified parameters of (a) conventional skew (𝛼3), kurtosis (𝛼4), and Pearson correlation (𝜌𝑗𝑘); (b) 𝐿-skew (𝜏3), 𝐿-kurtosis (𝜏4), and 𝐿-correlation (𝜂𝑗𝑘) based on samples of sizes 𝑛=25 and 𝑛=1000. The estimates for 𝛼3,4 were based on Fisher’s 𝑘-statistics that is, the formulae currently used by most commercial software packages such as SAS, SPSS, and Minitab for computing indices of skew and kurtosis (where 𝛼3,4=0 for the standard normal distribution). The formulae used for computing estimates for 𝜏3,4 were Headrick’s Equations (2.3) and (2.5) [15]. The estimate for 𝜌𝑗𝑘 was based on the usual formula for the Pearson product-moment of correlation statistic, and the estimate for 𝜂𝑗𝑘 was computed based on (3.13) using the empirical forms of the cdfs in (3.1) and (3.3). The estimates for 𝜌𝑗𝑘 and 𝜂𝑗𝑘 were both transformed using Fisher’s 𝑧 transformation. Bias-corrected accelerated bootstrapped average estimates, confidence intervals (C.I.s), and standard errors were subsequently obtained for the estimates associated with the parameters (𝛼3,4,𝜏3,4,𝑧𝜌𝑗𝑘,𝑧𝜂𝑗𝑘) using 10,000 resamples via the commercial software package Spotfire S+ [20]. The bootstrap results for the estimates of 𝑧𝜌𝑗𝑘 and 𝑧𝜂𝑗𝑘 were transformed back to their original metrics. Further, if a parameter (𝑃) was outside its associated bootstrap C.I., then an index of relative bias (RB) was computed for the estimate (𝐸) as RB=((𝐸𝑃)/𝑃)×100. The results of the simulation are reported in Tables 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, and 11 and are discussed in the next section.

5. Discussion and Conclusion

One of the advantages that 𝐿-moment ratios have over conventional moment-based estimators is that they can be far less biased when sampling is from distributions with more severe departures from normality [10, 19]. And inspection of the simulation results in Tables 6 and 7 clearly indicates that this is the case. That is, the superiority that estimates of 𝐿-moment ratios (𝜏3,𝜏4) have over their corresponding conventional moment-based counterparts (𝛼3,𝛼4) is obvious. For example, with samples of size 𝑛=25, the estimates of skew and kurtosis for Distribution 1 were, on average, only 32.4% and 4.2% of their associated population parameters, whereas the estimates of 𝐿-skew and 𝐿-kurtosis were 87.9% and 96.10% of their respective parameters. It is also evident from comparing Tables 6 and 7 that 𝐿-skew and 𝐿-kurtosis are more efficient estimators as their standard errors are significantly smaller than the conventional-moment-based estimators of skew and kurtosis.

Presented in Tables 8, 9, 10, and 11 are the results associated with the conventional Pearson and 𝐿-correlations. Overall inspection of these tables indicates that the 𝐿-correlation is superior to the Pearson correlation in terms of relative bias. For example, for moderate correlations (𝑛=25), the relative bias for the two heavy-tailed distributions (i.e., distributions 1 and 2) was 6% for the Pearson correlation compared with only 2.5% for the 𝐿-correlation. It is also noted that the variability of the 𝐿-correlation appears to be more stable than that of the Pearson correlation both within and across the different conditions.

In summary, the new 𝐿-moment-based procedure is an attractive alternative to the traditional conventional-moment-based procedure. In particular, the 𝐿-moment-based procedure has distinct advantages when distributions with large departures from normality are used. Finally, we note that Mathematica Version 8.0.1 [21] source code is available from the authors for implementing both the conventional and new 𝐿-moment-based procedures.

Appendix

System of Conventional Moment-Based Equations for Tukey -Distributions

The equations for the mean (𝛼1), variance (𝛼22), skew (𝛼3), and kurtosis (𝛼4) for conventional moment-based -distributions are given below without the details of their derivation. We would note that we derived (A.1)–(A.4) based on the formulae given in Headrick et al. [3, equations (16)(18)]. 𝛼1=12𝜋+112𝜋,1(A.1)𝛼22=𝐶2=1/123/2+1/123/22/𝜋12122,(A.2)𝛼3=4𝜋1324𝜋1322313133𝜋1123/2+1123/21𝜋13/2𝐶3/2,(A.3)𝛼461=3+145/2+1145/24𝜋214142𝜋1212+221123/2+1123/2𝜋1212+823+32𝜋1321321𝐶12.(A.4)