-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: pGPA in same data differents results [R]
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2009 10:37:10 -0700 (PDT)
From: Murat Maga <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
References: <[email protected]>

Dear Alejo,

The coordinates in your first and third sample are very close to each
other. Superimposition implementation in R is an iterative process, not
an exact one. I presume those difference are within acceptable errors.

The second set looks like scaled values of the 1st one. They are
probably scaled by their respective centroid sizes. In fact if you plot
those sets (1st and 2nd) independently I expect the relative position
will be identical.

What I am curious is why you get an unscaled values even though your
SCALE parameter is set to True on the third set.

Anyone?
M


morphmet wrote:


-------- Original Message --------
Subject:     pGPA in same data differents results [R]
Date:     Tue, 21 Jul 2009 10:47:34 -0700 (PDT)
From:     Alejo . <[email protected]>
To:     [email protected]



Dear Morphometricians,

I want to start  working with GM in R, and the first thing that I notice
is that there are differences between superimposed coordinates (partial
procrustes sup.) of same data using different approaches. I compared the
registered coordinates of gorf.dat data using procGPA (shapes package,
scale=F), and the functions in "Morphometrics with R", and the
coordinates have very different values. Other thing is that procGPA
report distances like "Kendall's Riemannian distance rho", and there is
no documentation of how to convert to procrustes distance ( if they are
different).

Thanks a lot in advance!




Here I paste a the coordinates of same indiv. but registered with
prcoGPA or with functions of "Morphometric with R" of gorf.dat data


procGPA(gorf.dat, scale=F) (scale=F Part. Proc. Sup.)
           [,1]       [,2]
[1,] -15.827220  115.57708
[2,]  14.952665 -107.48479
[3,] -35.791848  -76.45264
[4,] -33.230550  -43.55219
[5,] -29.636231   28.38585
[6,]  -4.185892   97.61937
[7,]  44.839077   31.61518
[8,]  58.879998  -45.70786

pgpa(gorf.dat) (Function from book "Morphometrics wih R")
           [,1]       [,2]
[1,] -0.06524372  0.4917185
[2,]  0.06166891 -0.4572943
[3,] -0.15354677 -0.3244428
[4,] -0.14207133 -0.1845946
[5,] -0.12550966  0.1212242
[6,] -0.01606360  0.4151549
[7,]  0.19121899  0.1336318
[8,]  0.24954719 -0.1953976


procGPA(gorf.dat, scale=T) (scale=T, Full Proc. Sup)
        [,1]       [,2]
[1,] -15.995843  116.60296
[2,]  15.111564 -108.43879
[3,] -36.092444  -77.14230
[4,] -33.516190  -43.94813
[5,] -29.907041   28.63165
[6,]  -4.246512   98.48805
[7,]  45.230989   31.90755
[8,]  59.415478  -46.10099




--
Replies will be sent to the list.
For more information visit http://www.morphometrics.org

Reply via email to