search for: paljenczi

It is not about "really arge total number of observations", but: set.seed(4711);tabs <- r2dtable(1e6, c(2, 2), c(2, 2)); A11 <- vapply(tabs, function(x) x[1, 1], numeric(1));table(A11) A11 0 1 2 166483 666853 166664 There are three possible matrices, and these come out in proportions 1:4:1, the one with all cells filled with ones being most common. Cheers, Jari

>>>>> Gustavo Fernandez Bayon <gbayon at gmail.com> >>>>> on Thu, 24 Aug 2017 16:42:36 +0200 writes: > Hello, > While doing some enrichment tests using chisq.test() with simulated > p-values, I noticed some strange behaviour. The computed p-value was > extremely small, so I decided to dig a little deeper and debug >

Hello, While doing some enrichment tests using chisq.test() with simulated p-values, I noticed some strange behaviour. The computed p-value was extremely small, so I decided to dig a little deeper and debug chisq.test(). I noticed then that the simulated statistics returned by the following call tmp <- .Call(C_chisq_sim, sr, sc, B, E) were all the same, very small numbers. This, at first,

> On 25 Aug 2017, at 11:23 , Jari Oksanen <jari.oksanen at oulu.fi> wrote: > > It is not about "really arge total number of observations", but: > > set.seed(4711);tabs <- r2dtable(1e6, c(2, 2), c(2, 2)); A11 <- vapply(tabs, function(x) x[1, 1], numeric(1));table(A11) > > A11 > 0 1 2 > 166483 666853 166664 > > There are