Hi Christoph, as always very interesting and informative post. Just one small thought from me - a total novice - I found the wording around the no-coffee days a little bit confusing. "π, the probability of getting a zero coffee day" implied to me that (1-π) had to be a coffee day (I recognise now it's just a way of illustrating the Poisson zero count possibility.) Maybe a better way of describing would be π is the probability of making an explicit decision not to have a coffee on a given day while λ is the number of coffees per day when one hasn't made that decision e.g. can also have 0 coffees due to forgetting or being too busy rather than because you explicitly *don't want one*.
Again not intended as criticism but maybe this note helpful for anyone else who's briefly stuck on that! Thanks again!
Your interpretation is correct. You could also swap it around so that pi stands for probably of a "coffee-day" and you would have to adapt the likelihood then.
Hi Christoph, as always very interesting and informative post. Just one small thought from me - a total novice - I found the wording around the no-coffee days a little bit confusing. "π, the probability of getting a zero coffee day" implied to me that (1-π) had to be a coffee day (I recognise now it's just a way of illustrating the Poisson zero count possibility.) Maybe a better way of describing would be π is the probability of making an explicit decision not to have a coffee on a given day while λ is the number of coffees per day when one hasn't made that decision e.g. can also have 0 coffees due to forgetting or being too busy rather than because you explicitly *don't want one*.
Again not intended as criticism but maybe this note helpful for anyone else who's briefly stuck on that! Thanks again!
Your interpretation is correct. You could also swap it around so that pi stands for probably of a "coffee-day" and you would have to adapt the likelihood then.