I am comparing fish communities at 2 sites (upstream vs downstream) with data collected in two seasons (wet and dry) over several years (2017-2022), with data from the first pair of wet and dry seasons representing the period before a treatment and subsequent data representing periods after the treatment. During each season I sampled each site four times, and recorded abundance of each fish species from each site. I did not conduct sampling during the last dry season due to resource constraints. The community compositions of the two sites over different seasons and periods are visualised in the NMDS biplots.
I am trying to do further analysis using PERMANOVA to look for any spatial-temporal changes in the fish commnities, mainly if the two groups are becoming more similar in the years following the treatment. As there are samples with no fishes recorded I have to remove those samples from the dataset, which means I have only three instead of four replicates in some of the site x season x year groups.
My question is, does it still make sense to use PERMANOVA if I have unequal sample size among groups, given the number of replicates from each are small (3-4)? I am planning to run the test separately for wet and dry seasons, but that means I still need to do two-way (site x year) PERMANOVAs for each of the seasons.
I learned from some of the online discussions that unequal sample size would be a problem for two (or more)-way PERMANOVAs and the problem of unequal sample size would be more prominent when the sample sizes are small. Would be grateful for any comments or insight on this. Thanks a tonne!
Related
Does anyone know how NBA.com calculates pace adjusted stats? When pulling data, there is a pace_adjust option -- I'm wondering how that differs from non pace adjusted. Conceptually I understand what it means, just wondering how they account for it. Thanks!
Pace adjusting is as simple as normalization. The rationale behind it is quite simple: To fairly compare two NBA teams, we have to normalize the number of game opportunities that they generate against common ground. Otherwise, it would be impossible to properly correlate game statistics between them. For example, that would be the case if you'd want to compare statistics coming from a fast-paced team like the Los Angeles Lakers (3rd highest pace in 2021/22 at 100.36) and a slow-paced team like the New York Knicks (bottom last pace in 2021/22 at a mere 95.11).
Formally, if M is a generic NBA player/team's metric, then its pace-adjusted value M_adj would be:
s = pace_lg / pace_tm
M_adj = s*M
where pace_lg and pace_tm are the league's and the team's pace, respectively. To calculate the league's pace (LP), we simply have to average the number of possessions of all NBA teams and adjust that for a full game (or 48 minutes). Instead, to calculate a team's pace (TP), we follow a slightly different formulation: We average the number of possessions of the team with their opponent's, and only then adjust for 48 minutes. Why? Because LP can be interpreted as a census of all possessions, whereas TP is a sample from the population of all possessions.
For practical use of pace adjusting, you can check out my breakdown of the player efficiency rating (PER).
P.S.: When I say "we" I refer to ESPN's J. Hollinger formulation of pace adjusting in the NBA. Different organizations or sports analytics services may slightly alter its computation.
I am trying to use gtsummary to count the number of times someone engaged in an action (a; binary variable, yes/no) in a given year (b, continuous variable, ranging from 2002-2020) by various demographic factors (c-z; i.e. race, income, educational attainment) for complex survey data. Is there anyway to do this in gtsummary? Furthermore, is there any way to use gtsummary to generate columns that would provide the percentage change (in absolute and relative terms) between two years for a given demographic factor (i.e. what is the percentage change between 2006 and 2020 in the number of times someone engaged in action "a" for (black/white/hispanic/mixed race) participants?
So far, I'm seeing the tbl_cross function can handle up to two variables, and tbl_svysummary seems equipped for more general summary statistics (i.e. counting the number of (black/white/hispanic) people by whether they engaged in action "a" or not) and not this more granular question I was wondering about.
Any guidance you have here would be much appreciated (and totally understand if this is beyond the scope of the package)! Thank you as always for your awesome work with gtsummary.
I am desperately searching for an efficient way - if there is one - to solve some kind of a recursive task in T-SQL (I could successfully model it in excel and on paper with an iterative solution - as many CMAs would for a small example, re-allocating shares of cost between pairs of support units serving each other in iterations and minimising the balancing unit's unallocated cost leftover to a reasonably small number to stop iterations/recursion).
Now I am trying to find a good scalable solution (or at least a feasible approach to it) how to achieve the same in T-SQL for this typical computational task in the managerial accounting area: when some internal support units service each other (and incur periodic costs, like salary etc) to produce at the end let's say 2 or 3 final products together as a firm, and as a result their respective shares of internally generated support overheads need to be reasonably (according to some physical base distribution, lets say - man hrs spent in each) allocated to these products' cost at the end of the costing exercise.
It would be quite simple if there was no reciprocal services: one support unit providing some service to other support units during the period (and a need to allocate respective costs too alongside this service qty flow) and the second and third support units doing the same thing to other support peers, before all their costs get properly berried into production costs and spread between respective products they jointly serviced (not equally for all support units, I'm using activity-based-costing approach here)... And in a real case there could be many more than just 2-3 units one could manually solve in excel or on paper. So, it really needs some dynamic parameters algorithm (X number of support units servicing X-1 peers and Y products in the period serviced based on some qty-measure/% square matrix allocation table) to spread their periodic cost to one unit of each product at the end. Preferably, somehow natively in SQL without using external .NET or other assembly references.
Some numeric example:
each of 3 support units A,B,C incurred $100, $200, $300 of expenses in the period and worked 50 man hrs each, respectively
A-unit serviced B-unit for 10 hrs and C-unit for 5 hrs, B-unit serviced A-unit for 5 hrs, C-unit serviced A-unit for 3 hrs and B-unit for 10 hrs
The rest of the support units' work time (A-unit 35 hrs: 30% for P1 and 70% for P2, B-unit 45 hrs: 35% for P1 and 65% for P2, C-unit 37 hrs for P2 for 100%) they spent servicing the output of two products (P1 and P2); this portion of their direct time/effort easily allocates to products - but due to reciprocal services to each other some share of support units' cost needs to be shifted to a respective product cost pool unequal to their direct time to product allocation (needs an adjusted mix coefficient for step 2 effects).
I could solve this in excel with iterating algorithm and use of VBA arrays:
(a) vector of period costs by each support unit (to finally reallocate to products and leave 0),
(b) 2dim array/matrix of coefficients of self-service between support units (based on man hrs - one to another),
(c) 2dim array/matrix of direct hrs service for each product by support units,
(d) minimal tolerable error of $1 (leftover of unallocated cost in a unit to stop iteration)
For just 2 or 3 elements (while still manually provable on paper) it is a feasible approach, but this becomes impossible to manually prove for a correct solution once I have 10-20+ support units and many products in a matrix; and I want to switch from excel and VBA to MS SQL server and t-sql for other reasons.
Since this business case as such is not new at all, I was hoping more experienced colleagues could throw an advise how to best solve this - I believed there must have been a solution to this task before (not in pure programming environment/external code).
I am thinking to combine CTE(recursive), table variables and aggregate window functions - but hesitate/struggle how to best/exactly put all puzzle elements together so it is truly scalable for my potentially growing unit/product matrix dimensions.
For my current level it's a little mind blowing, so I'd be grateful for an advice.
I know there are ways to find synonyms either by using NLTK/pywordnet or Pattern package in python but it isn't solving my problem.
If there are words like
bad,worst,poor
bag,baggage
lost,lose,misplace
I am not able to capture them. Can anyone suggest me a possible way?
There have been numerous research in this area in past 20 years. Yes computers don't understand language but we can train them to find similarity or difference in two words with the help of some manual effort.
Approaches may be:
Based on manually curated datasets that contain how words in a language are related to each other.
Based on statistical or probabilistic measures of words appearing in a corpus.
Method 1:
Try Wordnet. It is a human-curated network of words which preserves the relationship between words according to human understanding. In short, it is a graph with nodes as something called 'synsets' and edges as relations between them. So any two words which are very close to each other are close in meaning. Words that fall within the same synset might mean exactly the same. Bag and Baggage are close - which you can find either by iteratively exploring node-to-node in a breadth first style - like starting with 'baggage', exploring its neighbors in an attempt to find 'baggage'. You'll have to limit this search upto a small number of iterations for any practical application. Another style is starting a random walk from a node and trying to reach the other node within a number of tries and distance. It you reach baggage from bag say, 500 times out of 1000 within 10 moves, you can be pretty sure that they are very similar to each other. Random walk is more helpful in much larger and complex graphs.
There are many other similar resources online.
Method 2:
Word2Vec. Hard to explain it here but it works by creating a vector of a user's suggested number of dimensions based on its context in the text. There has been an idea for two decades that words in similar context mean the same. e.g. I'm gonna check out my bags and I'm gonna check out my baggage both might appear in text. You can read the paper for explanation (link in the end).
So you can train a Word2Vec model over a large amount of corpus. In the end, you will be able to get 'vector' for each word. You do not need to understand the significance of this vector. You can this vector representation to find similarity or difference between words, or generate synonyms of any word. The idea is that words which are similar to each other have vectors close to each other.
Word2vec came up two years ago and immediately became the 'thing-to-use' in most of NLP applications. The quality of this approach depends on amount and quality of your data. Generally Wikipedia dump is considered good training data for training as it contains articles about almost everything that makes sense. You can easily find ready-to-use models trained on Wikipedia online.
A tiny example from Radim's website:
>>> model.most_similar(positive=['woman', 'king'], negative=['man'], topn=1)
[('queen', 0.50882536)]
>>> model.doesnt_match("breakfast cereal dinner lunch".split())
'cereal'
>>> model.similarity('woman', 'man')
0.73723527
First example tells you the closest word (topn=1) to words woman and king but meanwhile also most away from the word man. The answer is queen.. Second example is odd one out. Third one tells you how similar the two words are, in your corpus.
Easy to use tool for Word2vec :
https://radimrehurek.com/gensim/models/word2vec.html
http://papers.nips.cc/paper/5021-distributed-representations-of-words-and-phrases-and-their-compositionality.pdf (Warning : Lots of Maths Ahead)
Just starting to play around with Neural Networks for fun after playing with some basic linear regression. I am an English teacher so don't have a math background and trying to read a book on this stuff is way over my head. I thought this would be a better avenue to get some basic questions answered (even though I suspect there is no easy answer). Just looking for some general guidance put in layman's terms. I am using a trial version of an Excel Add-In called NEURO XL. I apologize if these questions are too "elementary."
My first project is related to predicting a student's Verbal score on the SAT based on a number of test scores, GPA, practice exam scores, etc. as well as some qualitative data (gender: M=1, F=0; took SAT prep class: Y=1, N=0; plays varsity sports: Y=1, N=0).
In total, I have 21 variables that I would like to feed into the network, with the output being the actual score (200-800).
I have 9000 records of data spanning many years/students. Here are my questions:
How many records of the 9000 should I use to train the network?
1a. Should I completely randomize the selection of this training data or be more involved and make sure I include a variety of output scores and a wide range of each of the input variables?
If I split the data into an even number, say 9x1000 (or however many) and created a network for each one, then tested the results of each of these 9 on the other 8 sets to see which had the lowest MSE across the samples, would this be a valid way to "choose" the best network if I wanted to predict the scores for my incoming students (not included in this data at all)?
Since the scores on the tests that I am using as inputs vary in scale (some are on 1-100, and others 1-20 for example), should I normalize all of the inputs to their respective z-scores? When is this recommended vs not recommended?
I am predicting the actual score, but in reality, I'm NOT that concerned about the exact score but more of a range. Would my network be more accurate if I grouped the output scores into buckets and then tried to predict this number instead of the actual score?
E.g.
750-800 = 10
700-740 = 9
etc.
Is there any benefit to doing this or should I just go ahead and try to predict the exact score?
What if ALL I cared about was whether or not the score was above or below 600. Would I then just make the output 0(below 600) or 1(above 600)?
5a. I read somewhere that it's not good to use 0 and 1, but instead 0.1 and 0.9 - why is that?
5b. What about -1(below 600), 0(exactly 600), 1(above 600), would this work?
5c. Would the network always output -1, 0, 1 - or would it output fractions that I would then have to roundup or rounddown to finalize the prediction?
Once I have found the "best" network from Question #3, would I then play around with the different parameters (number of epochs, number of neurons in hidden layer, momentum, learning rate, etc.) to optimize this further?
6a. What about the Activation Function? Will Log-sigmoid do the trick or should I try the other options my software has as well (threshold, hyperbolic tangent, zero-based log-sigmoid).
6b. What is the difference between log-sigmoid and zero-based log-sigmoid?
Thanks!
First a little bit of meta content about the question itself (and not about the answers to your questions).
I have to laugh a little that you say 'I apologize if these questions are too "elementary."' and then proceed to ask the single most thorough and well thought out question I've seen as someone's first post on SO.
I wouldn't be too worried that you'll have people looking down their noses at you for asking this stuff.
This is a pretty big question in terms of the depth and range of knowledge required, especially the statistical knowledge needed and familiarity with Neural Networks.
You may want to try breaking this up into several questions distributed across the different StackExchange sites.
Off the top of my head, some of it definitely belongs on the statistics StackExchange, Cross Validated: https://stats.stackexchange.com/
You might also want to try out https://datascience.stackexchange.com/ , a beta site specifically targeting machine learning and related areas.
That said, there is some of this that I think I can help to answer.
Anything I haven't answered is something I don't feel qualified to help you with.
Question 1
How many records of the 9000 should I use to train the network? 1a. Should I completely randomize the selection of this training data or be more involved and make sure I include a variety of output scores and a wide range of each of the input variables?
Randomizing the selection of training data is probably not a good idea.
Keep in mind that truly random data includes clusters.
A random selection of students could happen to consist solely of those who scored above a 30 on the ACT exams, which could potentially result in a bias in your result.
Likewise, if you only select students whose SAT scores were below 700, the classifier you build won't have any capacity to distinguish between a student expected to score 720 and a student expected to score 780 -- they'll look the same to the classifier because it was trained without the relevant information.
You want to ensure a representative sample of your different inputs and your different outputs.
Because you're dealing with input variables that may be correlated, you shouldn't try to do anything too complex in selecting this data, or you could mistakenly introduce another bias in your inputs.
Namely, you don't want to select a training data set that consists largely of outliers.
I would recommend trying to ensure that your inputs cover all possible values for all of the variables you are observing, and all possible results for the output (the SAT scores), without constraining how these requirements are satisfied.
I'm sure there are algorithms out there designed to do exactly this, but I don't know them myself -- possibly a good question in and of itself for Cross Validated.
Question 3
Since the scores on the tests that I am using as inputs vary in scale (some are on 1-100, and others 1-20 for example), should I normalize all of the inputs to their respective z-scores? When is this recommended vs not recommended?
My understanding is that this is not recommended as the input to a Nerual Network, but I may be wrong.
The convergence of the network should handle this for you.
Every node in the network will assign a weight to its inputs, multiply them by their weights, and sum those products as a core part of its computation.
That means that every node in the network is searching for some coefficients for each of their inputs.
To do this, all inputs will be converted to numeric values -- so conditions like gender will be translated into "0=MALE,1=FEMALE" or something similar.
For example, a node's metric might look like this at a given point in time:
2*ACT_SCORE + 0*GENDER + (-5)*VARISTY_SPORTS ...
The coefficients for each values are exactly what the network is searching for as it converges.
If you change the scale of a value, like ACT_SCORE, you just change the scale of the coefficient that will be found by the reciporical of that scaling factor.
The result should still be the same.
There are other concerns in terms of accuracy (computers have limited capacity to represent small fractions) and speed that may enter this, but not being familiar with NEURO XL, I can't say whether or not they apply for this technology.
Question 4
I am predicting the actual score, but in reality, I'm NOT that concerned about the exact score but more of a range. Would my network be more accurate if I grouped the output scores into buckets and then tried to predict this number instead of the actual score?
This will reduce accuracy, although you should converge to a solution much faster with fewer possible outputs (scores).
Neural Networks actually describe very high-dimensional functions in their input variables.
If you reduce the granularity of that function's output space, you essentially state that you don't care about local minima and maxima in that function, especially around the borders between your output scores.
As a result, you are sacrificing information that may be an essential component of the "true" function that you are searching for.
I hope this has been helpful, but you really should break this question down into its many components and ask them separately on different sites -- potentially some of them do belong here on StackOverflow as well.