Timeline for How to scale circular variables [closed]
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
11 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 9 at 13:22 | history | closed |
Nick Cox User1865345 whuber♦ |
Needs details or clarity | |
| Oct 8 at 13:19 | comment | added | whuber♦ | The issues to which you refer seem to be artifacts of a poor simulation algorithm rather than inherent in any statistical problem. So: is your question really about scaling, or is it about simulating a distribution of times within an interval? | |
| Oct 8 at 10:54 | history | edited | statisticianwannabe | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
deleted 1 character in body
|
| Oct 8 at 10:23 | comment | added | statisticianwannabe | I apologize if I was not clear enough. I edited the question | |
| Oct 8 at 10:23 | history | edited | statisticianwannabe | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 550 characters in body
|
| Oct 8 at 8:52 | review | Close votes | |||
| Oct 9 at 13:28 | |||||
| Oct 7 at 19:57 | comment | added | whuber♦ | There's a fairly mindless solution that is likely to work well with PCA: express your circular variable as a (cosine, sine) pair and scale each coordinate separately. You might want to check for near collinearity and replace that pair with a linear combination of the components and scale that. This choice can be informed by your understanding of the effects of including nearly redundant variables in PCA. (Pending your responses to previous comments, though, this cannot be construed as an answer: it's just a comment.) | |
| Oct 7 at 19:56 | comment | added | cdalitz | Can you please elaborate what you mean by a cyclic variable in the range [0,1) and what rescaling should mean (if 0 and 1 are the same values, shall 0.25 and 0.75 become the same values)? Which values should be mapped to 0.75 and which to 0.25? Does, e.g., $x\to 0.25 + \sin(\pi x)^2 / 2$ do the trick? | |
| Oct 7 at 19:51 | comment | added | EdM | A circular variable wraps around back to some origin once it passes the high limit. Is there some specific reason you want the origin to be at 0.25 and to have a value wrap back to that value once it passes 0.75, as your question suggests? What's the problem with having the values start back at 0 when they wrap around? Or do want to get rid of the wrap-around altogether? Please address the comments by editing the question itself, as comments are easy to overlook and can be deleted. | |
| Oct 7 at 18:33 | comment | added | John Madden | What is best to do may depend on why you want to scale it. What are you trying to achieve by doing this? | |
| Oct 7 at 18:11 | history | asked | statisticianwannabe | CC BY-SA 4.0 |