Talk:Quasi-likelihood

A graph should have been displayed here but graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at pageviews.wmcloud.org

Formulae[edit]

If someone wants to include mathematical formulae please feel free, but please try to ensure that at least the initial paragraphs remain readable to those who don't read formulae. Qwfp (talk) 17:25, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Structure[edit]

It seems strange to me to start the article with overdispersion, this is just an application of the method but says nothing about the method itself. I am not sure if there is general agreement on the definition of quasi-likelihood, but I always understood it as a method based on *a likelihood function*, but the the wrong likelihood for the data at hand. Therefore, standard errors need to be corrected using the sandwich estimator. Please correct me if this is too narrow a view.158.143.77.29 (talk) 12:46, 24 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, this article needs a thorough rewrite. Biker333 (talk) 12:47, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Made an initial attempt, but still very rudimentary, hope others can look as well, this is a big and important field. Biker333 (talk) 13:09, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Badly written[edit]

This is an abominably written article as it now stands. I wonder if anyone is not offended when being spoken to like this except in an abstract. Michael Hardy (talk) 19:21, 28 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]