Fitting empirical distribution to theoretical ones with Scipy (Python)?

Question

INTRODUCTION: I have a list of more than 30,000 integer values ranging from 0 to 47, inclusive, e.g.[0,0,0,0,..,1,1,1,1,...,2,2,2,2,...,47,47,47,...]<

Answer 1

Forgive me if I don't understand your need but what about storing your data in a dictionary where keys would be the numbers between 0 and 47 and values the number of occurrences of their related keys in your original list?
Thus your likelihood p(x) will be the sum of all the values for keys greater than x divided by 30000.

Answer 2

Try the distfit library.

pip install distfit

# Create 1000 random integers, value between [0-50]
X = np.random.randint(0, 50,1000)

# Retrieve P-value for y
y = [0,10,45,55,100]

# From the distfit library import the class distfit
from distfit import distfit

# Initialize.
# Set any properties here, such as alpha.
# The smoothing can be of use when working with integers. Otherwise your histogram
# may be jumping up-and-down, and getting the correct fit may be harder.
dist = distfit(alpha=0.05, smooth=10)

# Search for best theoretical fit on your empirical data
dist.fit_transform(X)

> [distfit] >fit..
> [distfit] >transform..
> [distfit] >[norm      ] [RSS: 0.0037894] [loc=23.535 scale=14.450] 
> [distfit] >[expon     ] [RSS: 0.0055534] [loc=0.000 scale=23.535] 
> [distfit] >[pareto    ] [RSS: 0.0056828] [loc=-384473077.778 scale=384473077.778] 
> [distfit] >[dweibull  ] [RSS: 0.0038202] [loc=24.535 scale=13.936] 
> [distfit] >[t         ] [RSS: 0.0037896] [loc=23.535 scale=14.450] 
> [distfit] >[genextreme] [RSS: 0.0036185] [loc=18.890 scale=14.506] 
> [distfit] >[gamma     ] [RSS: 0.0037600] [loc=-175.505 scale=1.044] 
> [distfit] >[lognorm   ] [RSS: 0.0642364] [loc=-0.000 scale=1.802] 
> [distfit] >[beta      ] [RSS: 0.0021885] [loc=-3.981 scale=52.981] 
> [distfit] >[uniform   ] [RSS: 0.0012349] [loc=0.000 scale=49.000] 

# Best fitted model
best_distr = dist.model
print(best_distr)

# Uniform shows best fit, with 95% CII (confidence intervals), and all other parameters
> {'distr': <scipy.stats._continuous_distns.uniform_gen at 0x16de3a53160>,
>  'params': (0.0, 49.0),
>  'name': 'uniform',
>  'RSS': 0.0012349021241149533,
>  'loc': 0.0,
>  'scale': 49.0,
>  'arg': (),
>  'CII_min_alpha': 2.45,
>  'CII_max_alpha': 46.55}

# Ranking distributions
dist.summary

# Plot the summary of fitted distributions
dist.plot_summary()

# Make prediction on new datapoints based on the fit
dist.predict(y)

# Retrieve your pvalues with 
dist.y_pred
# array(['down', 'none', 'none', 'up', 'up'], dtype='<U4')
dist.y_proba
array([0.02040816, 0.02040816, 0.02040816, 0.        , 0.        ])

# Or in one dataframe
dist.df

# The plot function will now also include the predictions of y
dist.plot()

Note that in this case, all points will be significant because of the uniform distribution. You can filter with the dist.y_pred if required.

Answer 3

fit() method mentioned by @Saullo Castro provides maximum likelihood estimates (MLE). The best distribution for your data is the one give you the highest can be determined by several different ways: such as

1, the one that gives you the highest log likelihood.

2, the one that gives you the smallest AIC, BIC or BICc values (see wiki: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Akaike_information_criterion, basically can be viewed as log likelihood adjusted for number of parameters, as distribution with more parameters are expected to fit better)

3, the one that maximize the Bayesian posterior probability. (see wiki: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posterior_probability)

Of course, if you already have a distribution that should describe you data (based on the theories in your particular field) and want to stick to that, you will skip the step of identifying the best fit distribution.

scipy does not come with a function to calculate log likelihood (although MLE method is provided), but hard code one is easy: see Is the build-in probability density functions of `scipy.stat.distributions` slower than a user provided one?