similar to: cor.test(x,y)

Hi all, I'm not quite sure if this is a feature or a bug or if I just fail to understand the documentation: If I use cor() with pairwise.complete.obs and method=pearson, the result is a scalar: ->cor(c(1,2,3),c(3,4,6),use="pairwise.complete.obs",method="pearson") [1] 0.9819805 The documentation says that " '"pairwise.complete.obs"' only

Full_Name: Marek Ancukiewicz Version: 2.10.1 OS: Linux Submission from: (NULL) (74.0.49.2) Both cor() and cor.test() incorrectly handle ordered variables with method="kendall", cor() incorrectly handles ordered variables for method="spearman" (method="person" always works correctly, while method="spearman" works for cor.test, but not for cor()). In

Greetings. There seems to be a problem with the P-value computation in the cor.test with method="spearman". In R1.8.0 (MS Windows) I seem to be getting intermittently nonsense P-values, but the rho's are OK. I can get this reproducibly with the toy example attached where the first use is OK and subsequent calls with the same data give nonsense. (I have also seen the problem

Hi, R! Question1: I am trying to correlate two vectors of numbers (two columns of microarray signal values) by using the non-parametric Spearman's rank correlation coefficient rho: > cor.test(V2.Signal,V3.Signal,method="spearman") but I get the error message: Error in if (q > (n^3 - n)/6) pspearman(q - 1, n, lower.tail = FALSE) else pspearman(q, : missing value

Dear R maintainers, R is great. Now that I have that out of the way, I believe I have encountered a bug, or at least an inconsistency, in how Spearman and Kendall rank correlations are handled. Specifically, cor() and cor.test() do not produce the same answer when the data contain NAs. cor() treats the NAs as data, while cor.test() eliminates them. The option use="complete.obs" has

Full_Name: Ian Wilson Version: R-1.8.0 OS: Windows (but own compilation) Submission from: (NULL) (139.133.7.38) the p-value is incorrect for cor.test using method "spearman" in R-1.8.0. This was not the case in R-1.7.1. Version R-1.8.0 on Windows > cor.test(rnorm(50),rnorm(50),method="spearman") Spearman's rank correlation rho data: rnorm(50) and rnorm(50) S

Hello, Is there a way to extract output objects from a stats test without viewing the entire output? I am trying to do so in the following: define a vector of length j for( i in 1: length (vector)) { vector[i] = cor.test (datavector1, datavector2[i], method=("spearman")) } I would like the reported Spearman's rho to be saved in a vector. I have tried a few different ways of

Full_Name: David Simcha Version: 2.10 OS: Windows XP Home Submission from: (NULL) (173.3.208.5) > a <- c(1:10) > b <- c(1:10) > cor.test(a, b, method = "spearman", alternative = "greater", exact = TRUE) Spearman's rank correlation rho data: a and b S = 0, p-value < 2.2e-16 alternative hypothesis: true rho is greater than 0 sample estimates:

i can see source code of function > cor function (x, y = NULL, use = "everything", method = c("pearson", "kendall", "spearman")) { na.method <- pmatch(use, c("all.obs", "complete.obs", "pairwise.complete.obs", "everything", "na.or.complete"))

Hi, we are trying to do structural equation modelling on R. However, one of our predictor variables is categorical (smoker/nonsmoker). Now, if we want to run the sem() command (from the sem library), we need to specify a covariance matrix (cov). However, Pearson's correlation does not work on the dichotomous variable, so instead we produced a covariance matrix using the Spearman's (or

Hi, all. Yet another beginner to R : ) I wonder, how it's possible to get the value of a coefficient from the object produced by cor.test() ? > cor.test(a, b, method="spearman") Spearman's rank correlation rho data: a and b S = 21554.28, p-value = 2.496e-11 alternative hypothesis: true rho is not equal to 0 sample estimates: rho 0.6807955 Warning message: In

I would like to turn off the warnings from cor.test while retaining exact=NULL. Is that possible ? > cor.test(c(1,2,3,3,4,5), c(1,2,3,3,4,5), method = "spearman") Spearman's rank correlation rho data: c(1, 2, 3, 3, 4, 5) and c(1, 2, 3, 3, 4, 5) S = 0, p-value < 2.2e-16 alternative hypothesis: true rho is not equal to 0 sample estimates: rho 1 Warning message: In

Hello. Has any further action been taken regarding implementing David Simcha's fast Kendall tau code (now found in the package pcaPP as cor.fk) into R-base? It is literally hundreds of times faster, although I am uncertain as to whether he wrote code for testing the significance of the parameter. The last mention I have seen of this was in 2010

Arrrrr, I think I've found a bug in the behavior of the stats::cor function when NAs are present, but in case I'm missing something, could you look over this example and let me know what you think: > a = c(1,3,NA,1,2) > b = c(1,2,1,1,4) > cor(a,b,method="spearman", use="complete.obs") [1] 0.8164966 > cor(a,b,method="spearman",

Hi, I have the following two measurements stored in mat: > print(mat) [,1] [,2] [1,] -14.80976 -265.786 [2,] -14.92417 -54.724 [3,] -13.92087 -58.912 [4,] -9.11503 -115.580 [5,] -17.05970 -278.749 [6,] -25.23313 -219.513 [7,] -19.62465 -497.873 [8,] -13.92087 -659.486 [9,] -14.24629 -131.680 [10,] -20.81758 -604.961 [11,] -15.32194 -18.735 To calculate the ranking

Colleagues, I ran some nonparametric regressions in R (run in RedHat Linux), then a colleague repeated the analyses in SAS. When we obtained different results, I tested S-Plus (same Linux box). And, got yet different results. I replicated the results with a small dataset: DATA: 37.5 23 37.5 13 25 16 25 12 100 15 12.5 19 50 20 100 13 100 10 100 10 100 16 50 10 87.5

Hi, Standard correlations (Pearson's, Spearman's, Kendall's Tau) do not accurately reflect how closely the model (GAM) fits the data. I was told that the accuracy of the correlation can be improved using a root mean square deviation (RMSD) calculation on binned data. For example, let 'o' be the real, observed data and 'm' be the model data. I believe I can calculate

Dear HelpeRs, I have some data: "ice" <- structure(c(0.386, 0.374, 0.393, 0.425, 0.406, 0.344, 0.327, 0.288, 0.269, 0.256, 0.286, 0.298, 0.329, 0.318, 0.381, 0.381, 0.47, 0.443, 0.386, 0.342, 0.319, 0.307, 0.284, 0.326, 0.309, 0.359, 0.376, 0.416, 0.437, 0.548, 41, 56, 63, 68, 69, 65, 61, 47, 32, 24, 28, 26, 32, 40, 55, 63, 72, 72, 67, 60, 44, 40, 32, 27, 28, 33,

R: I got a warning message when running the cor.test function using both Spearman and Kendall rank correlations saying that the p-value may be incorrect due to ties in the data. My data has 35 obs and one series has 6 pairs of ties. Does anyone know if this would likely have a great effect on the p-values calculated.. The values look good; tau = -0.68 with p-value = 8e-9 and rho = =0.84

A search of the archives did not reveal an answer: For basic tests of association, where one has no a priori knowledge of the form of the relation or of the distributions of the variables, rank correlation seems like a good start. Why is cor.test() with Kendall and Spearman options relegated to the ctest package, rather than in the base package? Does this suggest that the developers consider