Which is not surprising as it is Pearson's. On Sat, Apr 23, 2011 at 9:29 PM, Lance Norskog <[email protected]> wrote: > The formula at the bottom of the page gives interesting results > compared to Pearson's and Spearman's. > > http://books.google.com/books?id=GYeCVypPpaAC&lpg=PA316&pg=PA316#v=onepage&q&f=false > > > On Sat, Apr 23, 2011 at 8:58 PM, Lance Norskog <[email protected]> wrote: >> This paper compares Pearson, Spearman and Hoeffding's D measure as >> similarity measures for DNA matching. It claims Hoeffding is the best. >> http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19634197 >> >> Chasing down Hoeffding as a similarity measure, the closest I've come >> is the Hoeffding Bound or Additive Chernoff Bound. Page 2, right-hand >> column has a description of the algorithm: >> http://www.cs.washington.edu/homes/pedrod/papers/kdd00.pdf >> >> Is this the right base math? Given this formula for acceptable errors, >> what would be the algorithm for a similarity measure? >> >> Also, what does a negative correlation value mean? Should I just look >> at the absolute value? >> >> -- >> Lance Norskog >> [email protected] >> > > > > -- > Lance Norskog > [email protected] >
-- Lance Norskog [email protected]
