Skip to main content
11 events
when toggle format what by license comment
Apr 13, 2017 at 12:44 history edited CommunityBot
replaced http://stats.stackexchange.com/ with https://stats.stackexchange.com/
Dec 4, 2014 at 10:22 comment added amoeba @raegtin and NRH (+1 btw): Just to clarify. Above two comments are correct if by "covariance" we understand the "off-diagonal part of the covariance matrix".
Jul 10, 2011 at 5:36 vote accept raegtin
Jun 29, 2011 at 5:53 history edited NRH CC BY-SA 3.0
added 1 characters in body
Jun 28, 2011 at 23:53 comment added NRH @raegtin, yes, I view the model as a model of the covariance matrix, and when you estimate the model, it is fair to say that you are maximizing the amount of explained covariance.
Jun 28, 2011 at 12:11 comment added raegtin Thanks for the update, this is a great explanation of FA! So when you say "the objective with the model is to best explain the covariance", do you mean the k factors really do maximize the amount of explained covariance?
Jun 28, 2011 at 5:40 comment added NRH @raegtin, I have edited the answer to explain my point of view, that this is a model of the covariance matrix. Any choice of factors obtained by rotations are, as I see it, equally good or bad at explaining the covariances in the data as they produce the same covariance matrix.
Jun 28, 2011 at 5:34 history edited NRH CC BY-SA 3.0
added 727 characters in body
Jun 27, 2011 at 5:18 history edited NRH CC BY-SA 3.0
added 2 characters in body
Jun 26, 2011 at 9:07 comment added raegtin Yep, I understand that there's not a unique choice of k factors (since we can rotate them and get the same model). But does any choice of k factors selected by factor analysis do some kind of "maximal explanation of correlation"?
Jun 26, 2011 at 6:44 history answered NRH CC BY-SA 3.0