Markov Chains and Markov Process - Part III

Markov Chain and Markov Process III unveiled in my lecture video available in this link <https://youtu.be/WQUaLNK7QAc>. Please visit this link.

Markov Chain and Markov Process - Part II

Taking a sick leave

The discussion on markov chain and markov process as a special case of conditional probability is continued today with an example of sickness and good health. The state of good health or bad health tomorrow for an individual can be explained by Markov Chains and Markov Process in the following manner.

P(bad health tomorrow )

=P(bad health today)P(bad health tomorrow|bad health today)+P(good health today)P(bad health tomorrow|good health today)

If a person is ill today  then the probability that he/she will feel ill tomorrow is higher than the probability that the person with good health feeling ill tomorrow. 

This can be explained by following notation.

P(bad health tomorrow|bad health today)>P(bad health tomorrow|good health today)

What is the probability that a person is ill on the third day (of the week)?

P(Bad health on third day)=P(bad health on second day)P(bad health on third day|bad health on second day)+P(good health on second day)P(bad health on third day| good health on second day) 

This  can be interlinked (like a chain) to the following expression

P(Bad health on second day)=P(bad health on first day)P(bad health on second day|bad health on first day)+P(good health on first day)P(bad health on second day| good health on first day) 

This inter-linkage (chain) will be discussed in detail in the next blog. 

Markov Chains and Markov Processes

Here the concept of conditional probability discussed in previous days  blogs (July 14 - July 30, 2017) is extended to Markov chain and Markov Processes. 

Let,

P(Rainy Day) = 0.3

P(Dry Day) = 0.7

We know that if it rains today then there are high chances that it might rain tomorrow that is the probability that it will rain tomorrow is high.  So the conditional probability that it will rain tomorrow given that it rains today is higher than the unconditional probability that it will rain tomorrow.

Notation wise

P(Rain Tomorrow|Rain Today)>P(Rain Tomorrow)

Conditional Probability>Unconditional Probability

P(Rains tomorrow)=P(Dry Today)P(Rains Tomorrow|Dry Today)+P(Rains Today)P(Rains Tomorrow|Rain Today)

Markov Processes are systems where outcome of the current state is highly dependent on the outcome of immediately preceding state.  Examples can be weather systems and state of well being of an individual. Here outcome of state today is heavily dependent on the  outcome of immediately preceding state. So probability that it rained one month ago has less influence on the probability that it rained today than the probability that it rained yesterday. State of well being of an individual can also be explained in the following manner. So these examples explain special case of conditional probability namely markov chains. This will be discussed in detail in the next blog.

Expectation and Conditional Expectation

The discussion on probability and conditional probability (previous day's blog) is continued to expectation and conditional expectation.

Let Z be a random variable denoting money spent by the state on the cardiac care of a citizen below 40 years.

E(Z) is the average money spent by the state per citizen below 40 years on its cardiac care.

E(Z)=P(Y1)E(Z|Y1)+P(Y2)E(Z|Y2)

=(Probability of a Heart attack before 40)(Average money spent by the state on caradiac care of a citizen with an incidence of heart attack before 40 years)+(Probability of no heart attack before 40 years)(Average money spent by the state on cardiac care of a citizen with no incidence of heart attack before 40)

so,

Expectation=Probability(condition1)* Conditional expectation+Probability(condition2)* Conditional expectation

Probability and Conditional Probability

The discussion is being continued. 

So,

Y1 stands for  incidence of a heart attack before 40.

Y2 stands for no incidence of a heart attack before 40.

X stands for the event of Blood pressure and Blood sugar beyond normal limits and cholesterol within normal limits.

Expenses on Cardiac Care

Probability and Conditional Probability

Probability and Conditional Probability

This is in continuation of the discussion on Probability and Conditional Probability of the Previous Blog.
Now we are using a general notation. Then the equation get's reduced to the following form.

Probability and Conditional Probability

Visualization of Probability & Conditional Probability

The tree diagram given in the image below helps visualize the main difference between conditional and unconditional probability. Here we continue with the example of the previous blog where conditions leading to a heart attack before 40 years are minutely analyzed.  

Visualization of conditional probability

Probability and Conditional Probability

Understanding conditional probability through Venn Diagrams

Conditional probability is normally computed under some additional conditions and "unconditional probability" is the probability where no additional conditions are provided. This is illustrated with example mentioned in the previous blog. Here the probability of having a heart attack before 40 years of age is minutely analyzed by a Venn Diagram. The venn diagram  below shows a rectangle representing all people ( in an area) below 40 years. The circles H, S, C and N  are those who have suffered a heart attack. The other region represents those without  a heart attack. The shaded region in the diagram below gives the  probability that a patient with  high level blood pressure and sugar but the level of cholesterol is within limits has a heart attack before 40 years of age. This is the ratio of number of elements in the shaded region divided by the total number of elements in H, S, C and N.

Understanding Venn Diagrams

Incidence of Heart Attack Below 40 years of Age

We are interested in finding the probability of a heart attack below 40 years of age. Venn diagrams help visualize the scenario of people having heart attack before age of 40 including those with high blood pressure denoted by H, high sugar denoted by S and high cholesterol denoted by C or a combination of these. N denotes those individuals who have stroke before 40 and have blood pressure, sugar and cholesterol within normal limits. The image below shows the venn diagram of those cases where the blood pressure and sugar are beyond normal limits but cholesterol is within the limits.  This way all the possible causes resulting to a heart attack before 40 years can be minutely analyzed and it's probability can be calculated. This analysis is based on collected data and can aid in correct diagnosis.

This venn diagram shows probability of a stroke with high levels of blood pressure and blood sugar

Exploring aic (Akaike Information Criterion)

Goodness of Fit of Statistical Models 

aic plays a key role in the interpretation of efficiency of probability models with respect to a model of reference. Here the ratio of two likelihood functions is taken and it is equivalent to the difference between the two loglikelihood functions. So the greater the difference between loglikelihood functions the greater is the difference in efficiency  between the models.

aic=-log(L(P1)/L(P2))+k

Here P1 is estimator of the parameter of model 1 and L(P1) is the likelihood function obtained from probability model 1. L(P2) is the likelihood function obtained from probabilitymodel 2, with P2 as the estimator of the parameter of this model. k is the degree of freedom.

aic = -[log(L(P1))-log(L(P2))]+k

This expression shows that the greater the difference [log(L(P1))-log(L(P2))] the higher the value of aic. So high value of difference indicates greater dissimilarity between model 1 and model 2. For relatively close models aic should be lower than the aic of relatively distant models. Smaller value of aic implies that the fit is good. The model with higher value of aic ( with respect to a model of reference)should be rejected. 

Fertility Rates as Development Indicators

Vital Statistics as Development Indicators 

The discussion on fertility rates as development indicators discussed in the previous BLOG is continued here. In the image below the fertility rates of Nepal and Germany are compared. These fertility rates are namely  Age specific fertility rate (ASFR) and Total fertility rate (TFR). This comparison shows that the development levels of two countries can be compared by comparing their fertility rates. In the previous blog a comparison between TFR was done to explain this concept . Here in the table (image)below ASFR and TFR are compared. ASFR is defined as the number of birth per 1000 women in that age group. For example, the ASFR for the age group 20-24 for Nepal in the year 2000-2005 and 1995-2000 is 231.2 and 257.4, implying that out of 1000 women in the age group 20-24, 231.2 gave birth in 2000-2005 and 257.4 gave birth in 1995 - 2000. This number has declined sharply from 1995 to 2005. Whereas in Germany this value is 53.4 and 58.5 respectively. In Germany the decline in not so drastic as compared to Nepal. ASFR attains its peak in Nepal in the age group 20-24. This implies that in Nepal most of the women bear children in the age group 20-24.The ASFR  data of Nepalbased on census 2011also exhibits this pattern. But in Germany ASFR is highest in the age group 25-29. As the country becomes more developed not only does the TFR decrease (Germany 1.3 , Nepal 3.7 in 2000-2005) but the age at which ASFR attains its peak  increases. The reason behind this is that as the development activity increases more and more women become economically active through various job opportunities coupled with such developments, this results in decrease in TFR. Many women shift their age when they bear their first child to later years (25-29 in Germany) resulting in highest ASFR in 25-29.

Comparison between Germany and India

Fertility Rates as Development Indicators

Development Indicators

Commonly used fertility measures are Total Fertility Rate (TFR), Age Specific Fertility Rate (ASFR), Crude Birth Rate (CBR), Net Reproduction Rate (NRR) and Gross Reproduction Rate (GRR). The rate of growth of population is viewed from different perspectives through these measures. Total fertility rate (TFR) is defined as the number of children that a woman bears in her entire fertility span. According to 2011 census TFR of Nepal is 2.52 with 1.52 for urban areas and 3.08 in rural areas. This means that a woman bears 2.52 children in her entire life span. The women in urban areas bear 1.52 children whereas the women in rural areas bear 3.08 children. TFR of Nepal in 1971 was 6.32. This shows that Nepal has made a big progress in the reduction of TFR from 6.32 in 1971 to 2.52 in 2011. A low TFR is related to high average life expectancy and low Infant Mortality Rate (IMR). In 2011 Census TFR of 2.52 is coupled with 66.6 years of average life expectancy and 40.5 IMR, implying that in 2011 a woman bears 2.5 children in her life time, a child born has life of on average 66.6 years and there are 40.5 infant deaths per 1000 live births. In the absence of use of contraceptives and birth control measures the TFR of a country is around 6. This is reflected by TFR of Nepal in 1971 of 6.32. High TFR is coupled with high IMR and low life expectancy at birth. This fact is validated by the rural and urban differential in these measures. According to 2011 census of Nepal, TFR urban is 1.54 and TFR rural is 3.08, IMR urban is 24.06 and IMR rural is 42.9 and finally the life expectancy at birth of Urban areas of Nepal is 70.5 and 66.6 for rural areas. High TFR indicates poor health facilities and health conditions in governmental hospitals in rural areas in contrast to urban areas. This is also coupled with a lower value of average life expectancy in rural areas and a very high IMR. High IMR also implies large deaths of infants due to poor nutrition of mother and poor health facilities.  Many countries in Africa like Sierra Leone, Angola have high incidence of diseases like Malaria and HIV AIDS have low average life expectancy (50.1and 52.4 years respectively in 2016) and high TFR (4.76 and 5.31 respectively in 2016). Many countries with low TFR (lower than 2), have a declining population as two people mother and father are replaced by less than 2people.  Countries with low TFR have high average life expectancy and low IMR. For example in 2016, TFR of Italy is 1.43, this is very low and it is coupled by a very low value of IMR of 3.3 deaths per 1000 live births and average life expectancy of 82.7 years. This is due to good health facilities provided by the government of such countries. A low value of IMR also indicates good nutritive diet received by the mother. So TFR can be related to the development status of a country, where a country with low TFR has high socioeconomic and developmental status in contrast to countries with high TFR. This discussion will be continued in the coming BLOGS.  

Maximum Likelihood Estimation illustrated with an example

Predicting the risk of Zika Virus infection

Here the concept of MLE explained in the blog on June 6 is explained with an example. Denoting by P the proportion  of babies infected by the Zika virus,  among the population of Zika virus infected pregnant mothers in an  area like say Brazil, this P is a population parameter. P is unknown, but we want to know its true value. But it is impossible to know the entire population and the population parameter due to time and monitory constraints. 10 samples of size 50 each are selected for the estimation of P. That is 10 samples of 50 Zika infected pregnant women are selected. So, n = 50 and m = 10. We are interested in finding the number of babies infected with zika virus among 50 zika infected pregnant women selected in 10 batches. So Xi is the random variable denoting number of zika infected babies in a sample of size 50. So, Xi = 0, 1, 2, ....50. So the MLE is the number of zika infected pregnant women bearing zika infected babies divided by 500. This gives the fraction of zika infected pregnant women bearing zika infected babies among 500 zika infected pregnant women and this is the MLE of P.

Exploring MLE and Maximum Likelihood Estimation

Maximizing the Likelihood

Maximum likelihood estimation chooses a sample statistic that maximizes the likelihood (probability function) of occurrence of sample for a particular parameter. Maximum likelihood estimation is based on the concept of Maxima and Minima. Through maximum likelihood estimator (MLE) an estimator is chosen; this estimator maximizes the likelihood of occurrence of the sample. The probability function of the occurrence of the sample is maximized by taking the derivative of the  log of the likelihood function (with respect to the parameter) and equating it to zero. This gives an estimator ( based on the sample) of the parameter. The second derivative of this loglikelihood function will be less than zero for this MLE. We also know that the probability function of this sample is based on a population parameter. Population is unknown and so is the population parameter. But the sample is known and we try to find the estimator based on the sample. This estimator maximizes the probability (likelihood) of this sample. For example 

Xi~B(n, P) that is X follows Binomial with parameter n and P. Here i = 1, 2, ....m

Then the MLE of P is  Sum of Xi (over all m)/nm and is given in the image below. This will be illustrated with an example in the next blog.

Rate or Ratio?

Mortality Rates

Vital Statistics analyzes vital events occurring in the life of an individual. Mortality, fertility and migration are some examples of such vital events. Vital statistics comprises of measures such sex ratio, crude birth rate, crude death rate etc. But terms Rate and Ratio are some what ambiguous. The definition of ratio here doesn't seem to confirm with the traditional mathematical definition which is as follows. A ratio is written as " a to b" or "a:b" and is expressed as quotient of two numbers.  Rate is mathematically defined as quantity measured with respect to another quantity. So rates are always defined in terms of  two units like miles per hour for speed or number per milliliter of water for bacterial growth. 

This ambiguity is illustrated with following example. Sex ratio is defined as number of males per 100 females.  So if sex ratio is 106 means by definition that there are 106 males per 100 females. So sex ratio 106 doesn't confirm with the traditional mathematical definition of ratio. Also if sex ratio is given as 1.06 then one should conclude that  there are 1.06 males per 1 female which is equivalent to the previous statement of 106:100. Now maternal mortality ratio (MMR) is defined as annual number of maternal deaths due to pregnancy related causes per 100,000 live births. But maternal mortality rate (MMR)is also number of maternal deaths per 100, 000 live births. Similarly Crude death rate (CDR) is number of deaths per 1000 people in the population and Infant mortality rates (IMR) number of deaths of infants per 1000 live births.

Intuitive approach is the best possible option for finding a way through this ambiguity. We should not be carried away by these numbers and loose our way in this ambiguity of definition. We should rather link these mathematical figures with country specific scenario. This way we will not loose track of the main objective, which is  getting a clear picture of development status of that country.

.........and one more tip in case of frequent events  like birth and death it is per 1000 and in case of less frequent  events like cause specific death rate it is expressed per 100,000.

Relation between Binomial, Poisson, Geometric and Negative binomial distributions

A small grocery store in a very busy market square

The interrelationship between these distributions is illustrated with following example.

Suppose that there is a small grocery store located in a very busy market square with several big stores and shopping malls. Hundreds of people are walking in this market square in a Saturday morning. Then the number of people entering this store is a random variable following Poisson distribution. Number of people making purchases upon their entry into this shop is a random variable  following Binomial distribution. Number of people making purchases before a person leaves the shop without buying anything is a random variable following geometric distribution. And lastly the number of people entering the shop before third person makes purchases more  Rs. 5, 000/- is also a random variable and follows negative binomial distribution. 

In this example, different random variables governed by probability law of different probability mass functions explain different aspects of a purchase in a small shop.

Statistical Analysis and Modelling of Vital Events

Mortality and Fertility Models for Countries with Limited Data

My book titled " Mortality and Fertility Models for Countries with Limited Data" is available on Amazon.  

It elucidates in a simple manner various methods of data generation, correction, prediction,  analysis  and interpretation. Here  I discuss the statistical analysis of vital events  namely Mortality , Fertility and Migration for countries with limited data like Nepal and India. 

Various techniques of data correction, data analysis and data prediction can be learnt from this book. There are several examples of vital events from Nepal, India and Germany in this book.

Learn various statistical techniques of data correction, analysis and interpretation

Insights into the concept of hypothesis testing (last Part)

When alpha is 0.025(z = 1.96) beta is 0.1866 and when alpha reduces to 0.005 (z = 2.55) beta increases to 0.3538.

When alpha is 0.025

Alpha is 0.025 and Beta is 0.1861

Alpha is 0.005 and Beta is 0.3583

The mathematics mentioned above is explained in this image

Insights into the Concept of Hypothesis Testing (Part 14)

Alpha decreases beta increases

This is continuation to the data on Population 1 and Population 2 given in yesterday’s BLOG. When alpha is 0.025(z = 1.96) beta is 0.1866 and when alpha reduces to 0.005 (z = 2.55) beta increases to 0.3538. This is explained in the diagram. The mathematics behind it will be explained in the next blog which is also the concluding part of the series “Insights into the concept of Hypothesis Testing”.

Insights into Concept of Hypothesis Testing (Part 13)

Decreasing Type I Error Increases Type II Error

Decreasing alpha increases beta

Population 1= {1, 1, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4, 4, 4, 5, 5}

Population Mean = 3 and Population variance = 1.263

Population 2 = {3, 3, 3, 4, 4, 4, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 6, 6, 6 }

Population Mean = 4.944, Population Variance = 1.719

The probability of rejecting a true null hypothesis is denoted by α (alpha) . Rejection of a true null hypothesis is called Type I Error. In the adjacent figure we see that alpha is the area of the region where sample coming from a parent population with mean 3 is still rejected and it is falsely concluded that it comes from a parent population with mean 4.944. Committing Type I error disturbs the status quo. So minimize this error and minimize alpha. But when we try to minimize alpha we increase beta, as seen from the area of alpha and beta shown above.

Insights into Hypothesis Testing (Part 12)

Understanding Mathematics behind Type I Error and Type II Error

Let’s consider the following population.

Population 1 = {1, 1, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4, 4, 4, 5, 5}

Mean = 3, Mode = 3, Median = 3

Population 2= {3, 3, 4, 4, 4, 4, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 6, 6, 6, 7, 8}

Mean = 5, Mode = 5, Median = 5

As shown in the blog of previous day if sample mean is more than 4.27 we conclude that the sample doesn’t belong to Population 1 and we commit type I error. But if the sample mean is less than 4.27 we accept the null hypothesis. Either we accept a true null hypothesis or accept a false null hypothesis. Type I error and Type II error with respect to Population I and Population mentioned above are explained by the following diagram

Type I Error and Type II Error

Insights into concepts of hypothesis testing (Part 11)

Demonstration of Type I Error with an Example

This example demonstrates how Type I error can be committed.  Suppose this is population data Population = {1, 1, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4, 4, 4, 4, 5, 5}.

It is a symmetric population with Population Mean = 3, Population Mode = 3 and Population Median = 3. These are unknown, but for the sake of ease of comprehension I have mentioned it here. Let’s draw a sample of size 3.

Sample = {4, 5, 5}

Due to variations in sampling we can get such an extreme sample with sample mean = 4.66.  We test the hypothesis that this sample comes from a population with mean 3.

Null Hypothesis: Population Mean is equal to 3

Alternative Hypothesis: Population Mean is not equal to 3

Under the assumption that population standard deviation is known and is 1.1239 the Z test statistics

is 2.55 and is more than 1.96. So here the null hypothesis is rejected at 5% level of significance and we conclude that the sample doesn’t come from this population. The p value is 0.0053. If the sample mean is greater than 4.27  we have to reject the null hypothesis and conclude that the sample mean is not 3.

Sample mean more than 4.27 than we reject the null hypothesis

Insights into concepts of Hypothesis Testing (Part 10)

Assumption of Normality of Parent Population

The population from which a sample is drawn is called a parent population. This parent population is usually unknown. Parametric tests under testing of hypothesis are based on the assumption of normality of parent population. Non parametric tests are not based on this assumption. Today’s discussion delves deeper into this assumption of normal population. We look at various transformations that convert a skewed (non normal) population to a normal population.

For the sake of simplicity let’s consider the following population. It is unknown under normal conditions.

Population = {1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 2, 5, 5, 20, 25}

This is a non normal or a positively skewed data. It is represented by following frequency curve on the left side of the image. Here. Hence Mode<Median<Mean for a positively skewed data.

If the population was normal it’s simplified version will be the following.

Population = {3, 4, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 6, 7}

It is represented by the frequency curve in the right side. Here Mean = Mode = Median = 5. For a normal data, Mean = Mode = Median.

For conducting parametric tests the parent population should be normal where mean, mode and median are very close to one another.

Some transformations like logarithmic, square root and power (1/4) can transform a skewed data by bringing the mean, mode and median closer to each other. But these transformations don’t change the shape of the frequency curve.

After we conduct logarithmic transformation to the non normal population that is {1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 2, 5, 5, 20, 25}, Mean = 5.15, Median = 2 and Mode = 1 changes to Mean = 0.385, Median = 0.301 and Mode = 0.  After doing the square root of the original data Mean = 1.86, Median = 1.414 and Mode = 1. And if power (1/4) is done for the original data, Mean = 1.3007, Mode = 1 and Median = 1.189. But these transformations don’t change the shape of the frequency curve. This is illustrated by the image below giving the screen shot of the excel worksheet comparing different transformations.

News “cycling to work can halve cancer risk” - from a statistical perspective

Holiday Special Update III

Today’s blog gives a statistical perspective on the article published in BBC health news on 20 April 2017 titled “Cycling to work halves cancer risk”.

Risk to a disease means the probability of catching that disease. Catching of a disease in an individual’s life time is a random event and it is a function of time. So denoting X(t) as a random variable denoting the state of having a disease (say cancer) at time t takes two values 0 and 1. x (t) = 0 implies a disease free state with some probability P(x (t) = 0) denoted by  p1 and x(t) = 1 implies the existence of a disease at time t with probability P(x(t) = 1) denoted by p2. Here p1+p2=1, because either an individual is in a state of health or he/she has a disease at time t and these two states are exhaustive and mutually exclusive. This disease could be as common as common cold or not as common as cancer. For a healthy and young individual p1>p2 and as time progresses implying that as an individual become older and older p2 becomes closer and closer to 1. These probabilities can be explained by a probability distribution. Diseases those are common in modern day life like high blood pressure and sugar can be explained by Binomial probability distribution. This distribution tends to normal distribution when the size of population is large. The incidence of not so common diseases/rare diseases can be explained by Poisson distribution and Negative binomial distribution. Normal distribution is a limiting case for these distributions as well. As the news says ”Cycling to work can halve the cancer risk”, this implies that p2, which is the probability of catching a disease (cancer) at time t is reduced by half when people cycle to their places of work. Similarly regular exercise and consumption of balanced diet can also reduce p2. p2 is a function of time/age and it increases as age increases. But its growth can be checked by cycling to work.

Human life is governed by several random events. These occurrences can be statistically analyzed by the probability distribution of random variables that explain these random events.  Clinical trials and data based research give us an idea of values of these p1 and p2.  This is an evidence/data based approach of estimating p1 and p2. This kind of research complements laboratory based research. If time and energy is invested in making a  foundation of good quality data, then breakthrough results can be obtained with much less time and money.

News “Publication of Gender Biased Books” - from a statistical perspective

Holiday Special Update II

Today’s blog gives a statistical perspective on the article published in BBC Asia on 15 April 2017 titled “India’s enquiry into sexist text books” and also on BBC radio journal talk ”Gender biased books”.

Gender biased is not gender balanced. Gender biased means giving preference to one specific gender. The article published in BBC Asia on 15 April 2017 “India’s enquiry into sexist text books” and talk program in BBC radio journal “Gender biased books” try to sensitize us to the importance of having gender balanced views for the sustainable development of the society. But what is gender balanced? Gender balanced attribute implies, maintaining the natural balance between number of male and number of female with respect to that attribute. Sex ratio measures this ratio between the number of male and the number of female.  It is normally defined as the number of males per 100 females. Sex ratio at birth measures this ratio between male and female at the time of birth. Under normal conditions and in the absence of any external biological intervention the sex ratio at birth is between 103 and 105.  This implies that there are normally 103 – 105 male births to every 100 female births. So if there are 100 births then 50.74% [(103/203)*100] are male and 49.26% are female. This is the gender balance given by nature.

For the publications to be gender balanced same ratio has to be maintained implying that for every 10 books published in the market 5 – 6 should portray male perspective of an issue and 4- 5 books should portray female perspective of the same issue. Or if there are 10 stories published in a book, 5-6 stories should have male in a lead role and 4-5 should have female heroines. So when a reader reads the entire book, he/she has an idea of how a man would think and also of how a woman would tackle an issue. Reading gender balanced books result in development of impartial views on any issue.

According to census 2011, sex ratio is 94 for Nepal. There are 94 male per 100 female when whole population of 2011 is taken into consideration.  Census 2011 tells that sex ratio in the age 00- 04 years is 105. So this drop from 105 to 94 is attributed to increased life expectancy of females in all age groups. Vast rural urban differential existing in many developing countries including Nepal is also reflected in the sex ratio.   Sex ratio is 104 for urban areas and 92.3 for rural areas. Male from rural areas migrate for education and employment to urban areas. Thus sex ratio in urban areas is higher and more than 100 in comparison to sex ratio of rural areas.

So what is gender balanced and what is gender biased? If sex ratio is close to 100 with respect to an attribute then that attribute is gender balanced and if sex ratio is much less than 100 or much more than 100 then it is gender biased.

Today’s news “World’s oldest person dies at 117 years” - From a statistical perspective

Holiday Special Update

I am on a summer vacation this week. There will not be regular daily updates but a holiday special update. I will look at the News published today in BBC on 16 April 2017, “World’s oldest person dies at 117 years” from statistical perspective. This lady hails from Italy and the average longevity of an Italian female is 84.8 years (source: http://www.worldlifeexpectancy.com/italy-life-expectancy). Italy ranks top sixth in 2015 in the global ranking of average life expectancy. Average life expectancy is a development indicator of that country. Higher average life expectancy means higher standard of living and better health care facilities provided by the government. Many questions arise in our mind as we read this news. Some of them are the following.

1.       What is it like to be the world’s oldest person?

2.       What is the probability of being world’s oldest person?

3.       What is the probability of being in a country’s top 2% longest living people?

Life Tables tries to address these questions and gives the mortality experience of a group called Cohort. l(x), q(x), L(x), T(x) and e(x) are some of the columns of Life tables. l(x) gives the conditional probability of surviving till age x given that a person has lived till age x-1. q(x) is the conditional probability of dying before age x given that the person has lived till age x-1. L(x) is the number of person years lived between x-1 to x. T(x) is the total number of person years lived till age x. e(x) is the average life expectancy at age x. The values of this life table are governed by the current mortality experience.

I will focus on the last column of life tables that is e(x) and specially on average life expectancy at birth e(0).  The average life expectancy of a Nepalese Woman is 67.97 years (Source: Population Monograph of Nepal 2014). Due to vast rural and urban differential in health facilities which are common to all developing countries, it is 71 years in urban area and 68 years in rural areas. This implies that under given health conditions and under given socioeconomic conditions a woman on average lives till 71 years in urban areas of Nepal. If this woman belongs to rural areas, she is exposed to the socioeconomic status and health conditions of rural areas and lives till 68 years on average. This is a very promising figure indicating that a woman of Nepal has 67.97 years to fulfill all her dreams and aspirations. In contrast to Nepal a woman from Italy has 84.8 years to meet all her dreams and aspirations. So she has on average 17 more years to live. The Italian lady mentioned in the BBC news today exceeded every Italian citizen with an average life expectancy of 82.7 years (Source:http://www.worldlifeexpectancy.com/italy-life-expectancy) by living till 117 years.  

The life expectancy at birth for a female in Nepal has increased from 28.5 years in 1954 to 67.9 years in 2011 (Source: Population Monograph of Nepal 2014). This is due to increasing modern health facilities that have reduced death rates such as maternal mortality rates, infant mortality rates and child death rates. If we assume that the standard deviation is 2 years then what is the age for top 2% in terms of female life expectancy for Nepal. The average life expectancy is normally distributed. The women living higher than 72 years comprise the top 2% of the female population given that the average longevity is normally distributed with mean 67.9 years and standard deviation of 2 years.  This is under the current mortality conditions. This portrayed in the image below.