Talk:Rank correlation

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Statistics (Rated Start-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon

This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Statistics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of statistics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page or join the discussion.

Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale.
 
WikiProject Mathematics (Rated Start-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject Mathematics
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mathematics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Mathematics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Mathematics rating:
Start Class
Mid Importance
 Field: Probability and statistics


Example please[edit]

I don't understand what this is all about. Thanks. 205.228.73.12 11:27, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

I agree that a lack of an example makes the content difficult to understand. I have added a new section on a rank correlation measure known as the rank-biserial correlation. I also worked through an example, so perhaps this will be easier to understand than the earlier sections. --Friend of facts2 (talk) 17:18, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

When?[edit]

Are there situations where Spearman's ρ is more suitabke than Kendall's τ, or vice-versa? How can we choose which one to use? I have no clue about it, but it would be useful to know that. Calimo (talk) 13:18, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

I agree. It is useless to list two options if no information is supplied allowing to somehow distinguish them at a glance without clicking individually each one and see for each one an explanation ignoring the other. 212.198.146.203 (talk) 06:47, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Kendall (1944) reference[edit]

The reference Kendall (1944) in the beginning of section Rank_correlation#General_correlation_coefficient is unavailable. Sieste (talk) 15:53, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

General Correlation Coefficient, notation[edit]

It would be much clearer, here and below, if the notation specified that when a sum iterates over and , we exclude the elements where . Perhaps

(although it would be nicer if the lower limits were stacked on two lines).

(I haven't addressed this, though I have made a few smaller changes for clarity.)

Eac2222 (talk) 14:25, 1 August 2016 (UTC)

Proof in the case of Kendall's τ[edit]

I believe an expert should look at this. The proof may be missing information, or incorrect.

If we have , then don't we also need to define as the rank of the th member according to the -quality, and define ?

(I haven't addressed this, though I have made a few smaller changes for clarity.)

Eac2222 (talk) 14:25, 1 August 2016 (UTC)