Re: Help please!!! Two stats questions from a biologist...
- From: filopo@xxxxxxxxx
- Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2007 18:47:09 -0700
On 25 jun, 18:34, Ray Koopman <koop...@xxxxxx> wrote:
On Jun 25, 3:01 pm, fil...@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
Thanks a lot guys! What do you know about Pearson's and Spearman's
distances? Are they suitable for comparing composition profiles? Ray:
Since the differences are to the square, Hellinger distance is
insenitive to negative and positive correlations, right?
Positive correlations (larger p's paired with larger q's,
smaller p's paired with smaller q's) will give smaller distances;
negative correlations (larger p's paired with smaller q's,
smaller p's paired with larger q's) will give larger distances.
I would call (1-r) and (1-rho) squared distances, not distances.
To get the analogous squared Hellinger distance, omit the outer
square root in the expression I gave. An alternate expression for
the squared Hellinger distance is 2(1 - sum sqrt(p_i*q_i)).
Roy:Interesting. Squared Hellinger distance is much more sensitive to
the
absence of one or more components than Pearson's, and that makes
much more biological sense. Very cool.Thanks!!
.
- Follow-Ups:
- References:
- Help please!!! Two stats questions from a biologist...
- From: filopo
- Re: Help please!!! Two stats questions from a biologist...
- From: Herman Rubin
- Re: Help please!!! Two stats questions from a biologist...
- From: filopo
- Re: Help please!!! Two stats questions from a biologist...
- From: Ray Koopman
- Help please!!! Two stats questions from a biologist...
- Prev by Date: Re: Help please!!! Two stats questions from a biologist...
- Next by Date: Re: Help please!!! Two stats questions from a biologist...
- Previous by thread: Re: Help please!!! Two stats questions from a biologist...
- Next by thread: Re: Help please!!! Two stats questions from a biologist...
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|