5
$\begingroup$

Suppose we compute the correlation PCA of a dataset $X$ (with $m$ variables and $n$ observations) by first normalizing the input variables. That is: mean -> 0 and standard deviation -> 1. Let us assume for the sake of this question that $\mu_i=0$ for our dataset. In that case we only need to normalize the standard deviation:

$$X'_{i,j}={X_{i,j}\over \sigma_i}$$

Once the correlation matrix $X'X'^T$ is computed, we calculate its SVD which provides us with the eigenvectors $U$.

To rotate/transform the input points in accordance with the eigenvectors we multiply them with $U^T$. My question now is do we perform this on the original input samples ($X$) or on the normalized samples ($X'$) ?

$\endgroup$
5
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ The normalized ones. Using standardized data to compute the eigenvectors but non-standardized data to compute projections would be weird. $\endgroup$
    – amoeba
    Commented May 1, 2016 at 23:30
  • $\begingroup$ I would also say the normalized data, however, if you calculate the correlation matrix without normalizing each of the variables, one might be tempted to use the non-normalized data. Hence the question. $\endgroup$
    – user113339
    Commented May 2, 2016 at 6:47
  • $\begingroup$ In any case, I think, you mean at least the centered data? As far as I recall earlier exercises it is the following. Finding the pc-s of the covariance matrix gives a different rotation in the SVD from that of finding the pc-s of the correlation matrix. (using the covariances gives the variables with more variance a greater weight in the computation of the rotation-criterion). So I'd use the respective rotation-matrices with normalized or unnormalized (but centered) data. $\endgroup$ Commented May 2, 2016 at 9:06
  • $\begingroup$ @GottfriedHelms you are correct that covariance and correlation matrices can be used. The question is however, if the data is mean centered and we use a correlation matrix, should we use the standard-deviation normalized or original samples to perform the projection on. $\endgroup$
    – user113339
    Commented May 2, 2016 at 10:34
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ ... the standard-deviation-normalized ones. $\endgroup$ Commented May 2, 2016 at 12:10

1 Answer 1

3
$\begingroup$

Use normalized variables.

PCA is an explorative method: every analysis choice (such as to center or not, to standardize or not, to normalize to unit variance or in some other way, etc.), is possible and can perhaps make sense in some specific situation. No recommendation is absolute.

Nevertheless, let us think of a typical situation.

PCA on correlation matrix is usually used when the variables are of different scale and because we believe that the normalized data cloud is a more meaningful representation of the dataset than the un-normalized cloud. If so, then it stands to reason to use the normalized data for PCA projection, and not only for PCA eigenvectors computation.

In addition, note that if you project un-normalized data on the eigenvectors of the normalized covariance matrix (i.e. correlation matrix), you will get correlated projections. In PCA we are used to uncorrelated principal components, so having correlated projections almost seems to defy the whole purpose of the method.

As an example, consider the wine dataset, encompassing 178 wines of 3 different grape varieties measured along the 13 variables. Left: 2D PCA projection using the covariance matrix. Middle: 2D PCA projection using the correlation matrix. Right: un-normalized (but centered) variables projected onto the correlation matrix eigenvectors.

PCA covariance correlation

It is pretty obvious that the middle projection is the most meaningful one, whereas the right one does not make a lot of sense at all.

$\endgroup$
3
  • $\begingroup$ Finally, I was waiting until someone would claim the answer :) $\endgroup$
    – user113339
    Commented May 4, 2016 at 14:38
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I didn't want to write an answer simply saying that it would be weird (as I did in my comment), and it took me some time to come up with a convincing argument against this "mixed" approach. $\endgroup$
    – amoeba
    Commented May 4, 2016 at 20:44
  • $\begingroup$ For myself I had already decided that the mixed approach makes no sense. Because, if you would be strict about it, you should in that case also apply the projection on the non centered data which makes even less sense. $\endgroup$
    – user113339
    Commented May 5, 2016 at 8:09

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.