Version: | 2.1.0 |
Title: | Canonical Correlations and Tests of Independence |
Description: | A simple interface for multivariate correlation analysis that unifies various classical statistical procedures including t-tests, tests in univariate and multivariate linear models, parametric and nonparametric tests for correlation, Kruskal-Wallis tests, common approximate versions of Wilcoxon rank-sum and signed rank tests, chi-squared tests of independence, score tests of particular hypotheses in generalized linear models, canonical correlation analysis and linear discriminant analysis. |
Author: | Robert Schlicht [aut, cre] |
Maintainer: | Robert Schlicht <robert.schlicht@tu-dresden.de> |
License: | EUPL version 1.1 | EUPL version 1.2 [expanded from: EUPL (≥ 1.1)] |
Imports: | stats |
NeedsCompilation: | no |
Packaged: | 2025-05-07 05:06:16 UTC; Schlicht |
Repository: | CRAN |
Date/Publication: | 2025-05-07 05:30:01 UTC |
Tests of Independence Based on Canonical Correlations
Description
cctest
estimates canonical correlations between two sets of
variables, possibly after removing effects of a third set of variables, and
performs a classical multivariate test of (conditional) independence based
on Pillai’s statistic.
Usage
cctest(formula, data = NULL, df = formula[-2L], ..., tol = 1e-07)
Arguments
formula |
A
|
data |
An optional list (or data frame) or environment containing
the variables in the model. Passing this argument without its full name
turns on the simplified |
df |
An optional |
... |
Additional optional arguments passed to
|
tol |
The tolerance in the QR decomposition for detecting linear dependencies of the matrix columns. |
Details
cctest
unifies various classical statistical procedures that involve
the same underlying computations, including t-tests, tests in univariate and
multivariate linear models, parametric and nonparametric tests for
correlation, Kruskal–Wallis tests, common approximate versions of Wilcoxon
rank-sum and signed rank tests, chi-squared tests of independence, score
tests of particular hypotheses in generalized linear models, canonical
correlation analysis and linear discriminant analysis (see Examples).
Specifically, for the matrices with ranks k
and l
obtained from
X
and Y
by subtracting from each column its orthogonal projection
on the column space of A
, the function computes factorizations
\tilde{X}U
and \tilde{Y}V
with \tilde{X}
and
\tilde{Y}
having k
and l
columns, respectively, such that
both \tilde{X}^\top \tilde{X}=rI
and \tilde{Y}^\top \tilde{Y}=rI
,
and \tilde{X}^\top \tilde{Y}=rD
is a rectangular diagonal matrix with
decreasing diagonal elements. The scaling factor r
, which should be
nonzero, is the dimension of the orthogonal complement of the column space of
A_{0}
.
The function realizes this variant of the singular value decomposition by
first computing preliminary QR factorizations of the stated form (taking
r=1
) without the requirement on D
, and then, in a second step,
modifying these based on a standard singular value decomposition of that
matrix. The main work is done in a rotated coordinate system where the column
space of A
aligns with the coordinate axes. The basic approach and the
rank detection algorithm are inspired by the implementations in
cancor
and in lm
, respectively.
The diagonal elements of D
, or singular values, are the estimated
canonical correlations (Hotelling 1936) of the variables
represented by X
and Y
if these follow a linear model
(X\;\;Y)=A(\alpha\;\;\beta)+(\delta\;\;\epsilon)
with known A
,
unknown (\alpha\;\;\beta)
and error terms (\delta\;\;\epsilon)
that have uncorrelated rows with expectation zero and an identical unknown
covariance matrix. In the most common case, where A
is given as a
constant 1
, these are the sample canonical correlations (i.e., based
on simple centering) most often presented in the literature for full column
ranks k
and l
. They are always decreasing and between 0 and 1.
In the case of the linear model with independent normally distributed rows
and A_{0}=A
, the ranks k
and l
equal, with probability 1,
the ranks of the covariance matrices of the rows of X
and Y
,
respectively, or r
, whichever is smaller. Under the hypothesis of
independence of X
and Y
, given those ranks, the joint
distribution of the s
squared singular values, where s
is the
smaller of the two ranks, is then known and in the case r\geq k+l
has a
probability density (Hsu 1939, Anderson 2003, Anderson 2007) given by
\rho (t_{1},...,t_{s})\propto \prod _{i=1}^{s}t_{i}^{(\left|k-l
\right|-1)/2}(1-t_{i})^{(r-k-l-1)/2}\prod _{i<j}(t_{i}-t_{j}),
1\geq t_{1}\geq \cdots \geq t_{s}\geq 0
. For s=1
this reduces to
the well-known case of a single beta distributed R^{2}
or equivalently
an F distributed R^{2}/(kl) \over (1-R^{2})/(r-kl)
, with the divisors
in the numerator and denominator representing the degrees of freedom, or
twice the parameters of the beta distribution.
Pillai’s statistic is the sum of squares of the canonical correlations, which
equals, even without the requirement on D
, the squared Frobenius norm
of that matrix (or trace of D^\top D
). Replacing the distribution of
that statistic divided by s
(i.e., of the mean of squares) with beta or
gamma distributions with first or shape parameter kl/2
and expectation
kl/(rs)
leads to the F and chi-squared approximations that the p-values
returned by cctest
are based on.
The F or beta approximation (Pillai 1954, p. 99, p. 44) is usually used with
A_{0}=A
and then is exact if s=1
. The chi-squared approximation
represents Rao’s (1948) score test (with a test statistic that is r
times Pillai’s statistic) in the model obtained after removing (or
conditioning on) the orthogonal projections on the column space of
A_{0}
provided that is a subset of the column space of A
; see
Mardia and Kent (1991) for the case with independent identically distributed
rows.
Value
A list with class htest
containing the following components:
x , y |
matrices |
xinv , yinv |
matrices |
estimate |
vector of canonical correlations, i.e., the
diagonal elements of |
statistic |
vector of p-values based on Pillai’s statistic and classical F (beta) and chi-squared (gamma) approximations |
df.residual |
the number |
method |
the name of the function |
data.name |
a character string representation of |
Note
The handling of weights
differs from that in lm
unless the nonzero weights are scaled so as to have a mean of 1. Also, to
facilitate predictions for rows with zero weights (see Examples), the square
roots of the weights, used internally for scaling the data, are always
computed as nonzero numbers, even for zero weights, where they are so small
that their square is still numerically zero and hence without effect on the
correlation analysis. An offset
is subtracted from all columns in
X
and Y
.
The simplified formula
syntax is intended to provide a simpler, more
consistent behavior than the legacy stats
procedure based on
terms.formula
, model.frame
and
model.matrix
. Inconsistent or hard-to-predict behavior
can result in model.matrix
, in particular, from the special
interpretation of common symbols, the identification of variables by deparsed
expressions, the locale-dependent conversion of character variables to
factors and the imperfect avoidance of linear dependencies subject to
options("contrasts")
.
Author(s)
Robert Schlicht
References
Hotelling, H. (1936). Relations between two sets of variates. Biometrika 28, 321–377. doi:10.1093/biomet/28.3-4.321, doi:10.2307/2333955
Hsu, P.L. (1939). On the distribution of roots of certain determinantal equations. Annals of Eugenics 9, 250–258. doi:10.1111/j.1469-1809.1939.tb02212.x
Rao, C.R. (1948). Large sample tests of statistical hypotheses concerning several parameters with applications to problems of estimation. Mathematical Proceedings of the Cambridge Philosophical Society 44, 50–57. doi:10.1017/S0305004100023987
Pillai, K.C.S. (1954). On some distribution problems in multivariate analysis (Institute of Statistics mimeo series 88). North Carolina State University, Dept. of Statistics.
Mardia, K.V., Kent, J.T. (1991). Rao score tests for goodness of fit and independence. Biometrika 78, 355–363. doi:10.1093/biomet/78.2.355
Anderson, T.W. (2003). An introduction to multivariate statistical analysis, 3rd edition, Ch. 12–13. Wiley.
Anderson, T.W. (2007). Multiple discoveries: distribution of roots of determinantal equations. Journal of Statistical Planning and Inference 137, 3240–3248. doi:10.1016/j.jspi.2007.03.008
See Also
Functions cancor
, anova.mlm
in
package stats
and implementations of canonical correlation analysis in
other packages such as CCP
(tests only), MVar
, candisc
(both including tests based on Wilks’ statistic), yacca
, CCA
,
acca
, whitening
.
Examples
## Artificial observations in 5-by-5 meter quadrats in a forest for
## comparing cctest analyses with equivalent 'stats' methods:
set.seed(0)
dat <- within(data.frame(row.names=1:150), {
plot <- sample(factor(c("a","b")), 150, TRUE) # plot a or b
x <- as.integer(runif(150,1,31) + 81*(plot=="b")) # x position on grid
y <- as.integer(runif(150,1,31) + 61*(plot=="b")) # y position on grid
ori <- sample(factor(c("E","N","S","W")), 150, TRUE) # orientation of slope
elev <- runif(150,605,645) + 5*(plot=="b") # elevation (in meters)
h <- rnorm(150, 125-.17*elev, 3.5) # tree height (in meters)
h5 <- rnorm(150, h, 2) # tree height 5 years earlier
h10 <- rnorm(150, h5, 2) # tree height 10 years earlier
c15 <- as.integer(rnorm(150, h10, 2) > 20) # 0-1 coded, 15 years earlier
sapl <- rnbinom(150, 2.6, mu=.02*elev) # number of saplings
})
dat[1:8,]
## t-tests:
cctest(h~plot~1, dat)
t.test(h~plot, dat, var.equal=TRUE)
summary(lm(h~plot, dat))
cctest(h-20~1~0, dat)
t.test(dat$h, mu=20)
t.test(h~1, dat, mu=20)
cctest(h-h5~1~0, dat)
t.test(dat$h, dat$h5, paired=TRUE)
t.test(Pair(h,h5)~1, dat)
## Test for correlation:
cctest(h~elev~1, dat)
cor.test(~h+elev, dat)
## One-way analysis of variance:
cctest(h~ori~1, dat)
anova(lm(h~ori, dat))
## F-tests in linear models:
cctest(h~ori~1+elev, data=dat)
cctest(h~ori~1|elev, dat)
anova(lm(h~1+elev, dat), lm(h~ori+elev, dat))
cctest(h-h5~(h5-h10):(1|x|x^2)~0, dat, subset=1:50)
summary(lm(h-h5~0+I(h5-h10)+I(h5-h10):(x+I(x^2)), dat, subset=1:50))
## Test in multivariate linear model based on Pillai's statistic:
cctest(h+h5+h10~x+y~1+elev, data=dat)
cctest(h|h5|h10~x|y~1|elev, dat)
anova(lm(cbind(h,h5,h10)~elev, dat),
lm(cbind(h,h5,h10)~elev+x+y, dat))
## Test based on Spearman's rank correlation coefficient:
cctest(rank(h)~rank(elev)~1, dat)
cor.test(~h+elev, dat, method="spearman", exact=FALSE)
## Kruskal-Wallis and Wilcoxon rank-sum tests:
cctest(rank(h)~ori~1, dat)
kruskal.test(h~ori, dat)
cctest(rank(h)~plot~1, dat)
wilcox.test(h~plot, dat, exact=FALSE, correct=FALSE)
## Wilcoxon signed rank test:
cctest(rank(abs(h-h5))~sign(h-h5)~0, subset(dat, h-h5 != 0))
wilcox.test(h-h5 ~ 1, dat, exact=FALSE, correct=FALSE)
## Chi-squared test of independence:
cctest(ori~plot~1, dat, ~0)
cctest(ori~plot~1, data=xtabs(~ori+plot,dat), df=~0, weights=Freq)
summary(xtabs(~ori+plot, dat, drop.unused.levels=TRUE))
chisq.test(dat$ori, dat$plot, correct=FALSE)
## Score test in logistic regression (logit model, ...~1 only):
cctest(c15~x|y~1, dat, ~0)
anova(glm(c15~1, binomial, dat, epsilon=1e-12),
glm(c15~1+x+y, binomial, dat), test="Rao")
## Score test in multinomial logit model (...~1 only):
cctest(ori~x|y~1, dat, ~0)
with(list(d=dat, e=expand.grid(stringsAsFactors=FALSE,
i=row.names(dat), j=levels(dat$ori))
), anova(
glm(d[i,"ori"]==j ~ j+d[i,"x"]+d[i,"y"], poisson, e, epsilon=1e-12),
glm(d[i,"ori"]==j ~ j*(d[i,"x"]+d[i,"y"]), poisson, e), test="Rao"
))
## Absolute values of (partial) correlation coefficients:
cctest(h~elev~1, dat)$est
cor(dat$h, dat$elev)
cctest(h~elev~1+x+y, data=dat)$est
cov2cor(estVar(lm(cbind(h,elev)~1+x+y, dat)))
cctest(h~x|y|elev~1, dat)$est^2
summary(lm(h~1+x+y+elev, dat))$r.squared
## Canonical correlations:
cctest(h|h5|h10~x|y~1, dat)$est
cancor(dat[c("x","y")],dat[c("h","h5","h10")])$cor
## Linear discriminant analysis:
with(list(
cc = cctest(h|h5|h10~ori~1, dat, ~ori)
), cc$y / sqrt(1-cc$est^2)[col(cc$y)])[1:7,]
#predict(MASS::lda(ori~h+h5+h10,dat))$x[1:7,]
## Correspondence analysis:
cctest(ori~plot~1, data=xtabs(~ori+plot,dat), df=~0, weights=Freq)[1:2]
#MASS::corresp(~plot+ori, dat, nf=2)
## Prediction in multivariate linear model:
with(list(
cc = cctest(h|h5|h10~1|x|y~0, dat, weights=plot=="a")
), cc$x %*% diag(cc$est,ncol(cc$x),ncol(cc$y)) %*% cc$yinv)[1:7,]
predict(lm(cbind(h,h5,h10)~1+x+y, dat, subset=plot=="a"), dat)[1:7,]
## Not run:
## Handling of additional arguments and edge cases:
cctest(h~h10~0, data=dat, offset=h5)
cctest(h-h5~h10-h5~0, dat)
anova(lm(h~0+offset(h5), dat), lm(h~0+I(h10-h5)+offset(h5), dat))
cctest(h~x~1, dat, weights=sapl/mean(sapl[sapl!=0]))
anova(lm(h~1, dat, weights=sapl), lm(h~1+x, dat, weights=sapl))
cctest(sqrt(h-17)~elev~1, dat=dat[1:5,])[1:2]
cctest(sqrt(h-17)~elev~1, data=dat[1:5,], na.action=na.exclude)[1:2]
scale(resid(lm(cbind(elev,sqrt(h-17))~1, dat[1:5,],
na.action=na.exclude)), FALSE)
cctest(ori:sum(Freq)/Freq-1~1~0, as.data.frame(xtabs(~ori,dat)),
weights=Freq^3/Freq/sum(Freq)/c(.4,.1,.2,.3))
chisq.test(xtabs(~ori,dat), p=c(.4,.1,.2,.3))
cctest(c15~h~1, dat, tol=0.999*sqrt(1-cctest(h~1~0,dat)$est^2))
summary(lm(c15~h, dat, tol=0.999*sqrt(1-cctest(h~1~0,dat)$est^2)))
cctest(c15~h~1, dat, tol=1.001*sqrt(1-cctest(h~1~0,dat)$est^2))
summary(lm(c15~h, dat, tol=1.001*sqrt(1-cctest(h~1~0,dat)$est^2)))
cctest(NULL~NULL~NULL)
cctest(0~0~0)
anova(lm(0~0), lm(0~0+0))
cctest(1~0~0)
anova(lm(1~0), lm(1~0+0))
cctest(1~1~0)
anova(lm(1~0), lm(1~0+1))
cctest(1~1~0, data=dat)
cctest(h^0~1~0, dat)
anova(lm(h^0~0, dat), lm(h^0~0+1, dat))
## End(Not run)