This solution is an example of the use of one type of generalized inverse.
There are a number of different generalizations that retain some of the
properties of an actual inverse. 

As indicated, a 95% rule will lose information. However, one can cutoff at
100% If one has n specimens in a p-dimensional space, then when n-1 < p
there will be eigenvectors with effectively zero eigenvalues that can be
eliminated with no loss of information about variation among the specimens. 

-----------------------
F. James Rohlf, Distinguished Professor
State University of New York, Stony Brook, NY 11794-5245
www: http://life.bio.sunysb.edu/ee/rohlf  

> -----Original Message-----
> From: morphmet [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> Sent: Monday, March 21, 2005 6:02 PM
> To: morphmet
> Subject: Re: generalised inverse matrices
> 
> Brett-
> 
> I'm not sure just what analysis you are carrying out, but one 
> alternative approach is to use a PCA to reduce the 
> dimensionality of your data prior to further analysis.  One 
> might discard some number of the PCA axes, retaining enough 
> to explain 95% of the variance in your data.
> 
> This is a loss of information of course, which may not be 
> acceptable in your analysis.
> 
> -Dave 
> 
> 
> ---- Original message ----
> >Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 09:27:19 -0500
> >From: morphmet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >Subject: generalised inverse matrices
> >To: morphmet <[email protected]>
> >
> >Hello All,
> >
> >I am having issues with singular matrices because the number
> of variables
> >(linear morphometric measures) I have far exceeds the number
> of samples. I
> >don't wish to introduce a bias into my analyses by selecting
> variables to
> >include/exclude from my data matrix, hence I am wondering
> about the validity
> >of using generalised inverse matrices.
> >
> >Is the use of generalised inverse matrices a valid/ accepted one?
> >Are generalised inverse matrices statistically robust and
> will people
> >believe my results?
> >Has anyone published using generalised inverse matrices?
> >How would I defend the use of generalised inverse matrices?
> >
> >Thanks in advance,
> >
> >Brett Human
> >
> >************************
> >Brett Human, PhD
> >Shark Researcher
> >27 Southern Ave
> >West Beach SA 5024
> >Australia
> >Ph: +61 8 8356 6891
> >email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >************************
> >--
> >Replies will be sent to the list.
> >For more information visit http://www.morphometrics.org
> >
> --
> Replies will be sent to the list.
> For more information visit http://www.morphometrics.org
> 

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

Reply via email to