The Demopædia Encyclopedia on Population is under heavy modernization and maintenance. Outputs could look bizarre, sorry for the temporary inconvenience

Multilingual Demographic Dictionary, second unified edition, English volume

Talk:43

Multilingual Demographic Dictionary, second unified edition, English vol.
Revision as of 16:06, 22 July 2018 by Nicolas Brouard (talk | contribs) (431-7 survival ration (double checked))
Jump to: navigation, search



430-1 sibling deaths method added(Double checked)

  • note 1: Add reporting of sibling deaths too.--Stan BECKER 18:09, 25 November 2014 (CET)
Yes Reference to Further developments in indirect mortality estimation. Hill K, Trussell J. is at least published in 1977 before the date of thus second unified edition which is late 80's after the German volume (1987). I added sibling deaths. Could you check the new sentence?--Nicolas Brouard (talk) 15:54, 7 November 2017 (CET)
Double checked by Stan (adding a s) --Nicolas Brouard (talk) 16:48, 21 July 2018 (CEST)

430-2 (double checked)

  • illness does not include accidents so maybe better to say "attended....at the time of his/her death" or some such.--Stan BECKER 18:09, 25 November 2014 (CET)
done. who has attended the deceased person at the time of his/her death. (double checked).--Nicolas Brouard (talk) 15:54, 7 November 2017 (CET)

431-1 Projective mortality analysis (double checked)

Possible misunderstanding of van de Walle who did not translate the following sentence (which exists in Arabic, German and Italian):
Le quotient perspectif de mortalité 5 est la probabilité qu’ont les individus d’une même génération ou d’un même groupe de générations de mourir entre deux 1er janvier. Le nom de ce quotient vient de son emploi dans le calcul des perspectives de population.--Nicolas Brouard 19:35, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
  • The Trilingual Demographic Dictionary Arabic-English-French of 1988 uses probability of dying within a calendar year*. --Nicolas Brouard 19:46, 11 June 2012 (CEST)
The projective mortality probability 5★ is the probability that individuals of the same cohort or group of cohorts died between two January 1. See Demographic analysis Pressat p 372. --Nicolas Brouard 18:20, 5 August 2013 (CEST)
  • I have taught projections for many years and we do NOT use survival probabilities from Jan to Jan but from midpoint and we call them survival ratios as ratios of Lx function.--Stan BECKER 18:09, 25 November 2014 (CET)
These are applied to midpoint populations and fertility similarly uses midpoint populations so unsure where "projective mortality probability" comes from.--Stan BECKER 18:09, 25 November 2014 (CET)
Yes I added a sentence to link with Lx: The projective mortality probability 5★ is the probability that individuals of the same cohort or group of cohorts died between two January 1st. The name of this probability comes from its use in the calculation of population projections. It is also equal to 1-Lx+n/Lx, where Lx is the person-years lived by the stationary population from exact age x to exact age x+n. But probability of dying within a calendar year is not fully exact because people are in a cohort, that is aged between x and x+n at January 1st of year T and survivors lived up to January 1st of year T+n and are aged between age x+n and x+2n. To be checked--Nicolas Brouard (talk) 16:15, 7 November 2017 (CET)
Double checked by Stan. --Nicolas Brouard (talk) 16:51, 21 July 2018 (CEST)

431-7 survival ration (to be checked)

as there might be a confusion with people starting at the exact same age, I added a note 7 which is closer of what Henry and Pressat are meaning with survival ratios.
  • 7. A survival ratio is the complement to one of the projective mortality probability. Individuals in the cohorts do not have the same age and therefore are not at the same risk of dying.. To be checked. --Nicolas Brouard (talk) 16:29, 7 November 2017 (CET)
  • As I recall from math demography, u(x) is the limit of m(x), not q(x) but maybe both???? Je n'ai pas Preston et al avec moi ici (Colombie).--Stan BECKER 18:09, 25 November 2014 (CET)
Yes, µ(x) is the limit of m(x,x+h) when h tends to 0. And µ(x)dx is the limit of of dxqx when dx tends to 0. A rate has a dimension (T-1), a probability doesn't have. But I don't see to what section you are referring.--Nicolas Brouard (talk) 16:37, 7 November 2017 (CET)
Double checked by Stan. --Nicolas Brouard (talk) 17:06, 22 July 2018 (CEST)

432-2 OK (double checked)

  • This is not true. We had this as exam question in math demo. One needs (lx, qx or dx) and (nax, Lx, Tx or ex). Of course it will work with, for example, only dx if one makes actuarial assumption. But the statement "generally derived..." is not so.--Stan BECKER 18:09, 25 November 2014 (CET)
OK. Is it important. I don't think so.
  • original cohort: synthetic?--Stan BECKER 18:09, 25 November 2014 (CET)
I think that original cohort is correct here.--Nicolas Brouard (talk) 16:42, 7 November 2017 (CET)

433-2 within the given age interval suppressed (Double checked)

it implies that it can't be confounded with the observed death distribution? Probably, but the reference to the table" might be necessary.
A la table de survie (432-3) correspond une table des décès 1 de même racine (432-5) qui représente la répartition par âges (325-6) des décès de la génération (116-1) envisagée; on appelle ceux-ci les décès de la table 2, par opposition aux décès observés.
The differences between the number of survivors (432.4) at different ages gives the number of deaths within the given age interval of the death function 1. --Nicolas Brouard 19:35, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
The Trilingual Demographic Dictionary Arabic-English-French of 1988 uses death of the life table*. --Nicolas Brouard 19:09, 11 June 2012 (CEST)
To the survivors function corresponds a death function 1 which is calculated as the differences between the number of survivors (432-4) at different ages within the given age interval. It is named the distribution of life table deaths 2★ in order to be distinguished from the crude distribution of deaths. --Nicolas Brouard 18:41, 5 August 2013 (CEST)
  • ....survivors at two different ages. DROP "at different ages within....interval"--Stan BECKER 18:09, 25 November 2014 (CET)
You are right: within the given age interval has been suppressed. (double checked)--Nicolas Brouard (talk) 16:49, 7 November 2017 (CET)

437-3 point of death (double checked)

point of death, ...or other event--Stan BECKER 18:21, 25 November 2014 (CET)

You are right in the general case of a Lexis diagram. But here the Lexis diagram is introduced a life table in a closed population without any other attrition that mortality. Kept as is. Double checked.--Nicolas Brouard (talk) 16:52, 7 November 2017 (CET)