similar to: mann-whitney U-test - U-value

Dear Sir, I am comparing two samples using wilcox.test in R. Literature appears to describe mann whitney u test as the most appropriate test to use on my data. is the wilcox.test function equivalent to mann-whitney u? Is there a way to gain the U-value as apposed to the W-value in R? Thank you

Given this example #start code a<-c(0,70,50,100,70,650,1300,6900,1780,4930,1120,700,190,940, 760,100,300,36270,5610,249680,1760,4040,164890,17230,75140,1870,22380,5890,2430) b<-c(0,0,10,30,50,440,1000,140,70,90,60,60,20,90,180,30,90, 3220,490,20790,290,740,5350,940,3910,0,640,850,260) wilcox.test(a, b, paired=FALSE) #sum of rank for first sample sum.rank.a <-

Hi, Could someone please tell me how to perform a Mann-Whitney U test on a dataset with 2 groups where one group has more data values than another? I have split up my 2 groups into 2 columns in my .txt file i'm using with R. Here is the code i have so far... group1 <- c(LeafArea2) group2 <- c(LeafArea1) wilcox.test(group1, group2) This code works for datasets with the same number

Hi all, The Kruskal-Wallis test is a generalization of the two-sample Mann-Whitney test to *k* samples. That being the case, the Kruskal-Wallis test with *k*=2 should give an identical p-value to the Mann-Whitney test, should it not? x1<-c(1:5) x2<-c(6,8,9,11) a<-wilcox.test(x1,x2,paired=FALSE) b<-kruskal.test(list(x1,x2),paired=FALSE) a$p.value [1] 0.01587302 b$p.value [1]

Dear r-helpers, I want to test groups of samples for significant differences. Question: Does Group1 differ significantly from group2. This is a question to be answered by mann-whitney-u-test. I know that I can use wilcox.test with 2 samples. My problem: How can r perform the test automatically if there are more than 2 groups in my data frame. Test group1 vs. 2, 1 vs. 3, 1 vs. 4, etc. This is

Hello, I'm having some issues grouping cases for some Mann-Whitney U tests I'm attempting to run. I'm willing to use wilcox.test if it'll work; I've also tried wilcox_test() from the "coin" package. Here's the deal: for each column (A through H), I would like to run the two-sample independent test, comparing Group 5 (CD8.14 through CD8.17) to Group 6 (CD8.18

Hello everyone, I'm having some trouble interpreting the results of a Wilcoxon (Mann-Whitney U) test. Hope you can help. This is the R script that I am running: a <- c(1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 3, 1, 1, 1, 2, 1, 5, 1, 1, 1, 3, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 3, 1, 1) b <- c(1, 2, 1, 1, 2, 3, 2, 2, 1, 2, 1, 1, 1, 2) wilcox.test(a, b, alternative="t", mu=0, exact=FALSE, paired=FALSE) #1st

Hello, I am hoping someone could shed some light into the Wilcoxon Rank Sum Test for me? In looking through Stats references, the Mann-Whitney U-test and the Wilcoxon Rank Sum Test are statistically equivalent. When using the following dataset: m <- c(2.0863,2.1340,2.1008,1.9565,2.0413,NA,NA) f <- c(1.8938,1.9709,1.8613,2.0836,1.9485,2.0630,1.9143) and the wilcox.test command as

Does anyone have a piece of code or know how I can use R to generate a table of critical values for the Mann-Whitney (aka Wilcoxon Rank Sum) test. Ideally, I'd like a table that contains the critical values for any two samples of size 3 through 30. I could use Monte Carlo simulation or the normal approximation when n1 and n2 are greater than, 10, but I figured someone may know how to

Hi, I do want to use the Mann-Whitney test which ranks my data and then uses those ranks rather than the actual data. Here is the R code i am using: group1<- c(1.34,1.47,1.48,1.49,1.62,1.67,1.7,1.7,1.7,1.73,1.81,1.84,1.9,1.96,2, 2,2.19,2.29,2.29,2.41,2.41,2.46,2.5,2.6,2.8,2.8,3.07,3.3) > group2<-

Dear all, I want to compare the efficiency of 2 methods in extracting proteins from algal samples. I collected 6 independant algal samples and I extracted 3 by the method 1 and 3 others by the method 2. So I have 2 groups of 3 samples, that are not paired. I would like to know if the results obtained by these 2 methods are significantly different, I hope method 2 to be more efficient than method

Hi, I have a statistical question. To apply the Mann Whitney test to compare a pair of vectors, they must to have the same length ? Thanks, Rodrigo [[alternative HTML version deleted]]

Hello, can someone please help me with coding a function for a bootstrap WMW test (package boot, R under Windows, version 1.6.2)?

An earlier post had posed the question: "Does anybody know what is relation between 'T' value calculated by 'wilcox_test' function (coin package) and more common 'W' value?" I found the question interesting and ran the commands in R and SPSS. The W reported by R did not seem to correspond to either Mann-Whitney U, Wilcoxon W or the Z which I have more

Hello List, I'm trying to prepare some lecture notes on non parametric methods, and I can't manually reproduce the results of the wilcox.test function for ordinal data. The data I'm using are from David Howell's website, available here http://www.uvm.edu/~dhowell/StatPages/More_Stuff/OrdinalChisq/OrdinalChiSq.html If I run the wilcox.test function on the data I get a p-value of

>Hola colegas, no encuentro como hacer el Mann-Whitney U Test en R. > > Alguna solución????? > > Un abrazo a todos. > > Leonardo > Hola Leonardo: La prueba de Mann-Whitney también se conoce como la prueba de suma de rangos de wilcoxon y puede calcularse mediante la función wilcox.test Un saludo, Nicolás Benítez Parejo Técnico de Evaluación e Investigación Agencia

I am new to R and have two scripts written slightly different but should to relatively the same thing but my lack of experience with the program I can not figure out the what I need to do to correct it. The first script gives me a consistent mean fold change values with every run but can generate negative p values for some. For the second version of the script, the fold changes seem to be very

Hi, I believe I have significantly improved [dpq]wilcox functions by implementing Harding's algorithm: Harding, E.F. (1984): An Efficient, Minimal-storage Procedure for Calculating the Mann-Whitney U, Generalized U and Similar Distributions, App. Statist., 33, 1-6 Results on my computer show (against R-2.9.1): > system.time( dwilcox( 800, 800, 80) ) user system elapsed 0.240

I have been examining the Mann-Whitney test closely. And there are two features of the R implementation that puzzles me. The test statistic is reported as "W" and depends on the order of the arguments to the function. > x <- c(1,3,5,7,9) > y <- x-1 > x [1] 1 3 5 7 9 > y [1] 0 2 4 6 8 > wilcox.test(x, y)$statistic W 15 > wilcox.test(y,x)$statistic W 10

The function 'wilcox.test' in R and S gives (almost) identical results (see below). 'qwilcox' however, does not: > qwilcox(p,5,5) p: 0.025 0.975 -------------------- R> 3 22 S> 18 37 I originally wanted to ask a questions, but then I found the answer. Given the confusion I run into, I wonder if this experience is worth reporting. The