similar to: prcomp & eigenvectors ... ??

Dear all, I've used the 'prcomp' command to calculate the eigenvalues and eigenvectors of a matrix(gg). Using the command 'principal' from the 'psych' package  I've performed the same exercise. I got the same eigenvalues but different eigenvectors. Is there any reason for that difference? Below are the steps I've followed: 1. PRCOMP #defining the matrix

Hello, I have a short question about the prcomp function. First I cite the associated help page (help(prcomp)): "Value: ... SDEV the standard deviations of the principal components (i.e., the square roots of the eigenvalues of the covariance/correlation matrix, though the calculation is actually done with the singular values of the data matrix). ROTATION the matrix of variable loadings

G'Day R users! Following an ordination using prcomp, I'd like to test which variables singnificantly contribute to a principal component. There is a method suggested by Peres-Neto and al. 2003. Ecology 84:2347-2363 called "bootstrapped eigenvector". It was asked for that in this forum in January 2005 by J?r?me Lema?tre: "1) Resample 1000 times with replacement entire

In comparing the results of princomp and prcomp I find: 1. The reported standard deviations are similar but about 1% from each other, which seems well above round-off error. 2. princomp returns what I understand are variances and cumulative variances accounted for by each principal component which are all equal. "SS loadings" is always 1. 3. Same happens

Dear listserv, I am trying to perform a principal components analysis and create an output table of the eigenvalues for the dependent variables. What I want is to see which variables are driving each principal components axis, so I can make statements like, "PC1 mostly refers to seed size" or something like that. For instance, if I try the example from ?prcomp > prcomp(USArrests,

After doing a PCA using princomp, how do you view how much each component contributes to variance in the dataset. I'm still quite new to the theory of PCA - I have a little idea about eigenvectors and eigenvalues (these determine the variance explained?). Are the eigenvalues related to loadings in R? Thanks, Paul -- View this message in context:

I do not understand, from a PCA point of view, the option center=F of prcomp() According to the help page, the calculation in prcomp() "is done by a singular value decomposition of the (centered and possibly scaled) data matrix, not by using eigen on the covariance matrix" (as it's done by princomp()) . "This is generally the preferred method for numerical accuracy"

I have the following situation I want to analyse with prcomp. Each subject has a curve called the contrast sensitivity function (CSF). This curve's overall shape is due to the additive output of 3 "channels" (eigenvectors). #this shows 3 SF channels; net CSF = c1 + c2+c3 x<-1:100 c1<-dnorm(x,mean=20,sd=20) c2<-dnorm(x,mean=50,sd=20) c3<-dnorm(x,mean=80,sd=20)

Hello, I did a pca with over 200000 snps for 340 observations (ids). If I plot the eigenvectors (called rotation in prcomp) 2,3 and 4 (e.g. plot (rotation[,2]) I see a strange "column" in my data (see attachment). I suggest it is an artefact (but of what?). Suggestion: I used prcomp this way: prcomp (mat), where mat is a matrix with the column means already substracted followed by a

May be a simple question, but not understanding why in princomp I get different results for loadings and summary for my eigenvectors and eigenvalues. When I use pc.cr$loadings using the USArrests dataset the proportion of variance is equal for each of the components, but when summary(pc.cr) is used the proportion of variance is showing different proportions. My question is why do they differ? I

Hi, How the eigenvectors output by the eigen() function are ordered. The first column corresponds to the largest eigenvalue? or is the last column as in Octave? I'm performing a spatial-temporal analysis of some climatic variables so my matrices are MxN (locations*time)and I'm looking for the leading EOF's. As I have understand the eigenvectors columns represent those EOF's

Hello. Consider the following matrix: mp <- matrix(c(0,1/4,1/4,3/4,0,1/4,1/4,3/4,1/2),3,3,byrow=T) > mp [,1] [,2] [,3] [1,] 0.00 0.25 0.25 [2,] 0.75 0.00 0.25 [3,] 0.25 0.75 0.50 The eigenvectors of the previous matrix are 1, 0.25 and 0.25 and it is not a diagonalizable matrix. When you try to find the eigenvalues and eigenvectors with R, R responses: > eigen(mp) $values [1]

Hi, I was wondering if function eigen() does something different from the function call eigen() in SAS. I'm in the process of translating a SAS code into a R code and the values of the eigenvectors and eigenvalues of a square matrix came out to be different from the values in SAS. I would also appreciate it if someone can explain the difference in simple terms. I'm pretty new to both

Hello list, Sorry, these questions are not directly linked to R. If I consider an indefinte real matrix, I would like to know if the symmetry of the matrix is sufficient to say that their eigenvectors are real ? And what is the conditions to ensure that eigenvectors are real in the case of an asymmetric matrix (if some conditions exist)? Thanks in Advance, St?phane DRAY

Hi All, I'd like to build a package for the community that replicates the output produced by SAS "proc varclus". According to the SAS documentation, the first few steps are: 1. Find the first two principal components. 2. Perform an orthoblique rotation (quartimax rotation) on eigenvectors. 3. Assign each variable to the rotated component with which it has the higher squared

Dear R-listers Is there anyone who knows why I get different eigenvectors when I run MatLab and R? I run both programs in Windows Me. Can I make R to produce the same vectors as MatLab? #R Matrix PA9900<-c(11/24 ,10/53 ,0/1 ,0/1 ,29/43 ,1/24 ,27/53 ,0/1 ,0/1 ,13/43 ,14/24 ,178/53 ,146/244 ,17/23 ,15/43 ,2/24 ,4/53 ,0/1 ,2/23 ,2/43 ,4/24 ,58/53 ,26/244 ,0/1 ,5/43) #R-syntax

Hi dear R-users I try to reproduce the steps included in a LDA. Concerning the eigenvectors there is a difference to SPSS. In my textbook (Bortz) it says, that the matrix with the eigenvectors V usually are not normalized to the length of 1, but in the way that the following holds (SPSS does the same thing): t(Vstar)%*%Derror%*%Vstar = I where Vstar are the normalized eigenvectors. Derror

Hello alls, I found in the literature a technique that has been evaluated as one of the more robust to assess statistically the significance of the loadings in a PCA: bootstrapping the eigenvector (Jackson, Ecology 1993, 74: 2204-2214; Peres-Neto and al. 2003. Ecology 84:2347-2363). However, I'm not able to transform by myself the following steps into a R program, yet? Can someone could help

According to R help: princomp() uses eigenvalues of covariance data. prcomp() uses the SVD method. yet when I run the (eg., USArrests) data example and compare with my own "hand-written" versions of PCA I get what looks like the opposite. Example: comparing the variances I see: Using prcomp(USArrests) ------------------------------------- Standard deviations: [1] 83.732400 14.212402

Hi. I have been looking at the PCAproj function in package pcaPP (R 2.4.1) for robust principal components, and I'm trying to interpret the results. I started with a data matrix of dimensions RxC (R is the number of rows / observations, C the number of columns / variables). PCAproj returns a list of class princomp, similar to the output of the function princomp. In a case where I can