Nikos: > > * Present first the variance (=eigenvalues) because it's the > >first thing you will look at to know "how much variance of the > >original data is _expressed_ in each new component. > > * The importance, since it refers to the eigenvalue, it's better > >to come right after it.
Hamish: > to me it picks your eye more quickly if it is not buried in the > middle. > shrug. the important thing is that the numbers are correct & not > confusing. Yes, the important thing are the numbers. A clear output is also more "functional", if I may say so. > > * Present the loadings (eigenvectors) for each new > > component. > we are doing that already, right? Absolutely. It's just the structure of the output what remains. I have no objections to whatever will be decided as long as the _numbers_ are there. Nonetheless, from a user's perspective, I presented my ideas about the output. > > * Column-wise or row-wise? The results can be either > > presented column-wise, that is one column for each new component > > _or_ row-wise, as they are currently printed. I think row-wise just > > looks better :-) > maybe, but row-wise is slightly easier to code. For the interpretation I think the way that the output will look like, is just a matter to get used to it. In fact, I think row-wise is easier than column-wise. Anyway, this is of minor importance. > > "Some" examples... (only 2 for column-wise and > > all the rest row-wise... playing around). > fancy tables are hard for the module output because it uses > G_message() > and G_message() condenses any whitespace (multiple spaces, tabs,..) to > a > single space. thus formatting is lost. > > and i.pca's main output is maps, not eigen data so I guess it makes > sense > to keep that text optional instead of sending to stdout. Perhaps a New > flag to print summary report to stdout? (mmph, just cut&paste from > history) > for map history it's a bit better, but I can't end with a %. > now 'r.info -h' output looks like: > > Eigen values, (vectors), and [percent importance]: > PC1 1170.12 ( -0.63 -0.65 -0.43 ) [ 88.07% ] > PC2 152.49 ( 0.23 0.37 -0.90 ) [ 11.48% ] > PC3 6.01 ( 0.75 -0.66 -0.08 ) [ 0.45% ] > > > module output is same but not as pretty due to G_message() issue. Well, whatever is practical and achievable. I would be happy to see more suggestions upon this. But I like it now that it prints out the eigenvalues. Best regards, Nikos _______________________________________________ grass-stats mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/grass-stats
