similar to: test for contingency table when there are many zeros

I'm using R1.7.0 runing with Win XP. Thanks, ...Tao ???????????????????????????????????????????????????????? >x [,1] [,2] [1,] 149 151 [2,] 1 8 >t(x) [,1] [,2] [1,] 149 1 [2,] 151 8 >chisq.test(x, simulate.p.value=T, B=100000) Pearson's Chi-squared test with simulated p-value (based on 1e+05 replicates) data: x X-squared = 5.2001, df =

Hello all, Let say I have 2-way contingency table: Tab <- matrix(c(8, 10, 12, 6), nr = 2) and the Chi-squared test could not reject the independence: > chisq.test(Tab) Pearson's Chi-squared test with Yates' continuity correction data: Tab X-squared = 1.0125, df = 1, p-value = 0.3143 However I want to get all possible contingency tables under this independence

Hi, I have a text mining project and currently I am working on feature generation/selection part. My plan is selecting a set of words or word combinations which have better discriminant capability than other words in telling the group id's (2 classes in this case) for a dataset which has 2,000,000 documents. One approach is using "contrast-set association rule mining" while the

Dear R help I have been trying to conduct a chi square test on two groups of variables to test whether there is any relationship between the two sets of variables chisq.test(oxygen, train) Pearson's Chi-squared test data: oxygen X-squared = 26.6576, df = 128, p-value = 1 > chisq.test(oxygen) Pearson's Chi-squared test data: oxygen X-squared = 26.6576, df = 128,

Dear all Seems that puzzles always come in packs. I was asked to help with some statistics in blood analysis. (You can not refuse your wife's asks :-). She has contingency table for values IgVH mutation and ZAP expression. I can do chi-square test (in R) and get a results, and with some literature I can try explain them. However she found an article in which they use SPSS and use

Dear all, I am trying to validate a model by comparing simulated output values against observed values. I have produced a simple X-y scatter plot with a 1:1 line, so that the closer the points fall to this line, the better the 'fit' between the modelled data and the observation data. I am now attempting to quantify the strength of this fit by using a statistical test in R. I am no

Hi Tao: The P-values for 2x2 table are generated based on a random (discrete uniform distribution) sampling of all possible 2x2 tables, conditioning on the observed margin totals. If one of the cells is extremely small, as in your case, you get a big difference in P-values. Suppose, you changed the cell with value 1 to, say, 5 or 6, then the two P-values are nearly the same. However, I

I am getting "Chi-squared approximation may be incorrect in: chisq.test(x)" with the data bleow. Frequency distribution of number of male offspring in families of size 5. Number of Male Offspring N 0 518 1 2245 2 4621 3 4753 4 2476 5

Hello, I am trying to fit gamma, negative exponential and inverse power functions to a dataset, and then test whether the fit of each curve is good. To do this I have been advised to calculate predicted values for bins of data (I have grouped a continuous range of distances into 1km bins), and then apply a chi-squared test. Example: > data <- data.frame(distance=c(1,2,3,4,5,6,7),

Dear List, If any of observed and/or expected data has less than 5 frequencies, then chisq.test (Pearson's Chi-squared Test for Count Data from package:stats) gives warning messages. For example, x<-c(10, 14, 10, 11, 11, 7, 8, 4, 1, 4, 4, 2, 1, 1, 2, 1, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1) y<-c(9.13112391745095, 13.1626482033341, 12.6623267638188, 11.0130706413029, 9.16415925139016,

Hello I have the matrix a<-matrix(c(2,1,0,1,2,2,1,5,7,2,5,12),nrow=6) a [,1] [,2] [1,] 2 1 [2,] 1 5 [3,] 0 7 [4,] 1 2 [5,] 2 5 [6,] 2 12 Suppose that in the first row we have 3 men of England, 2 with hair, and 1 no In the second we have 6 italian men, 1 with hair and 5 no ... I want to find if there is a dependence between men withouth hair and

An organization has asked me to comment on the validity of their recent all-employee survey. Survey responses, by geographic region, compared with the total number of employees in each region, were as follows: > ByRegion All.Employees Survey.Respondents Region_1 735 142 Region_2 500 83 Region_3 897 78

Dear all, I have a dataset with qualitative variables (factors) and I want to test the null hypothesis of independance between two variables for each pair by using appropriate tests on contingency tables. I first applied chisq.test and obtained dependance in almost all cases with extremely small p-values and warning messages. > chisq.test(table(data$ins.f, data$ins.st))$p.val [1]

Full_Name: Reginaldo Constantino Version: 2.8.0 OS: Ubuntu Hardy (32 bit, kernel 2.6.24) Submission from: (NULL) (189.61.88.2) For many tables, chisq.test with simulate.p.value=TRUE gives a p value that is obviously incorrect and inversely proportional to the number of replicates: > data(HairEyeColor) > x <- margin.table(HairEyeColor, c(1, 2)) >

Hello everybody, I'm seeing some strange behavior on R 1.8.1 on Intel/Linux compiled with gcc 3.2.2. The p-value calculated from the chisq.test function is incorrect for some input values: > chisq.test(matrix(c(0, 1, 1, 12555), 2, 2), simulate.p.value=TRUE) Pearson's Chi-squared test with simulated p-value (based on 2000 replicates) data: matrix(c(0, 1, 1,

Is Pearson's Chi-Square test for contingency tables asymptotically unbiased for large tables (large degrees of freedom) regardless of the expected values in each cell? The rule of thumb is that Pearson's Chi-square should not be used when large numbers of cells have expected values < 5. However, I compared the results on 4x4 contingency tables for R's chisq.test using chi-square

Dear All, I have a problem understanding the difference between the outcome of a fisher exact test and a chi-square test (with simulated p.value). For some sample data (see below), fisher reports p=.02337. The normal chi-square test complains about "approximation may be incorrect", because there is a column with cells with very small values. I therefore tried the chi-square with

I want to calculate chi square test of goodness of fit to test, Sample coming from Poisson distribution. please copy this script in R & run the script The R script is as follows ########################## start ######################################### No_of_Frouds<- c(4,1,6,9,9,10,2,4,8,2,3,0,1,2,3,1,3,4,5,4,4,4,9,5,4,3,11,8,12,3,10,0,7) N <- length(No_of_Frouds) # Estimation of

I know this is something simple that I cannot do because I do not yet "think" in R. I have a data frame has a variable participation (a factor), and several other factors. I want a chisq test (no contingency tables) for participation vs all of the other factors. In SPSS I would do: CROSSTABS /TABLES= (my other factors) BY participation /FORMAT=NOTABLES /STATISTICS=CHISQ

R Help on 'chisq.test' states that "if 'simulate.p.value' is 'TRUE', the p-value is computed by Monte Carlo simulation with 'B' replicates. In the contingency table case this is done by random sampling from the set of all contingency tables with given marginals, and works only if the marginals are positive... In the