Karolis K
2019-Jun-21 15:00 UTC
[Rd] [Suggested patch] to fligner.test - constant values can produce significant results
In specific cases fligner.test() can produce a small p-value even when both groups have constant variance. Here is an illustration: fligner.test(c(1,1,2,2), c("a","a","b","b")) # p-value = NA But: fligner.test(c(1,1,1,2,2,2), c("a","a","a","b","b","b")) # p-value < 2.2e-16 This can potentially get dangerous if people perform lots of parallel tests of this type (i.e. when doing a test for each gene in genomic studies). Submitted a proposed patch that should solve the issue by producing an error "data is essentially constant" - which is the same error message found in t-test under similar conditions. P.S. First time writing to this list. Read all the guides of posting, but sorry in advance if I still missed any rules. svn.diff: Index: src/library/stats/R/fligner.test.R ==================================================================--- src/library/stats/R/fligner.test.R (revision 76710) +++ src/library/stats/R/fligner.test.R (working copy) @@ -55,6 +55,8 @@ ## Careful. This assumes that g is a factor: x <- x - tapply(x,g,median)[g] + if (all(x == 0)) + stop("data are essentially constant") a <- qnorm((1 + rank(abs(x)) / (n + 1)) / 2) STATISTIC <- sum(tapply(a, g, "sum")^2 / tapply(a, g, "length")) --- Karolis Koncevi?ius [[alternative HTML version deleted]]
Martin Maechler
2019-Jun-25 08:11 UTC
[Rd] [Suggested patch] to fligner.test - constant values can produce significant results
>>>>> Karolis K >>>>> on Fri, 21 Jun 2019 18:00:36 +0300 writes:> In specific cases fligner.test() can produce a small p-value even when both > groups have constant variance. > Here is an illustration: > fligner.test(c(1,1,2,2), c("a","a","b","b")) > # p-value = NA > But: > fligner.test(c(1,1,1,2,2,2), c("a","a","a","b","b","b")) > # p-value < 2.2e-16 > This can potentially get dangerous if people perform lots of parallel tests > of this type (i.e. when doing a test for each gene in genomic studies). I agree; this is really misleading and dangerously wrong. > Submitted a proposed patch that should solve the issue by producing an > error "data is essentially constant" - which is the same error message > found in t-test under similar conditions. I'm much less agreeing on that remedy (and also the solution for t.test()): In many similar situations, it has been very fruitful to have R's algorithms behave "generalized continuous"ly. I have defined this as (something like) "The value at infinity should correspond to the limit going to infinity" (and also applying that to 1/0 == Inf which is the correct limit in the case where the "0" is known to be non-negative, as here for the variance/sd) In this case (H0: variances in groups are equal), I'd argue that H0 should *not* be rejected, and the "most correct" P-value to be 1 . After all, both groups have the same variance, 0. In the t.test() case (H0: group means are equal; variances are equal (or not: that's optional var.equal = TRUE / FALSE): When the two group variances are 0, there are 2 cases, and I claim something like the following should happen by "generalized continuity": 1) if the group means are equal H0 is not rejected (P = 1) 2) if the group means differ, H0 is clearly rejected (P = 0) {where for '1)' I could also agree on being undecided and returning P = NaN} Returning an error in this case, as t.test() has been doing, seems a waste (loss of information) in my view. But for now, let's not discuss t.test() but the "var tests" (homogeneity of variances) > P.S. First time writing to this list. Read all the guides of posting, but > sorry in advance if I still missed any rules. well, thank you, but your post is really "perfect" in all formal senses (correct mailing list, reproducible example code, using plain text, being polite ;-), even proposing a patch via diff ) ==> really very well done and a role model for others! Thank you indeed for raising the issue and proposing a patch. We should discuss here ... i.e. hear other opinions etc. Note that there ca 5 different such tests for homogeneity of variances (fligner.test, bartlett.test, var.test, ansari.test, mood.test) and the behavior of the other 4 tests should also be considered .. > svn.diff: > Index: src/library/stats/R/fligner.test.R > ================================================================== > --- src/library/stats/R/fligner.test.R (revision 76710) > +++ src/library/stats/R/fligner.test.R (working copy) > @@ -55,6 +55,8 @@ > ## Careful. This assumes that g is a factor: > x <- x - tapply(x,g,median)[g] > + if (all(x == 0)) > + stop("data are essentially constant") > a <- qnorm((1 + rank(abs(x)) / (n + 1)) / 2) > STATISTIC <- sum(tapply(a, g, "sum")^2 / tapply(a, g, "length")) > --- > Karolis Koncevi?ius > [[alternative HTML version deleted]] > ______________________________________________ > R-devel at r-project.org mailing list > https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
Apparently Analagous Threads
- Small bug in fligner.test - constant values can produce significant results (patch attached)
- fligner.test (ctest) (PR#6739)
- different results from fligner.test
- Fligner-Policello robust rank test
- Unexpected behaviour when testing for independence with multiple factors