0
$\begingroup$

I have to test for significant differences between scenarios. Data consist of the length of a segment divided by the total length of the network. They are distributed between 0 (never equal to 0) and 1, with the length of the network changing. My data contains also many 1s. An example is:

basin scenario 1 scenario 2 scenario 3 Network length
1 1.00 0.11 0.5 15
2 0.95 0.7 0.13 1500

I tried a GLM with quasi-binomial family in R with model 'data ~ scenario' The summary is :

Coefficients:

Estimate Std. Error t value Pr(>t)
(Intercept) 2.91314 0.10747 27.107 <2e-16 ***
scenario 1 -0.05700 0.15008 -0.380 0.704
scenario 2 -0.08756 0.14910 -0.587 0.557
scenario 3 -0.10635 0.14851 -0.716 0.474

------- cut ----------

(Dispersion parameter for quasibinomial family taken to be 0.594791)

Null deviance: 3166.8 on 10539 degrees of freedom.

Residual deviance: 3165.0 on 10530 degrees of freedom

The test is never significant neither for scenarios nor for pairwise comparison (with means). Am I using the correct distribution for these data? Is it fully correct to use a GLM to test for significant differences among groups of data in a case like this?

$\endgroup$
1
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ What do you want to test? $\endgroup$
    – Dave
    Jun 16 at 15:37
0
$\begingroup$

A suggestion: You could investigate (test via simulation) based on the Triangular Distribution.

Not confident that you get anything useful here (as your data appears to be somewhat sparse), but a simulation exercise could provide insights on expected accuracy as your sample size increases. Results could also be compared (and/or combined) with other approaches.

Background: Per Wikipedia, to quote:

Distribution of the absolute difference of two standard uniform variables

This distribution for a = 0, b = 1 and c = 0 is the distribution of X = |X1 − X2|, where X1, X2 are two independent random variables with standard uniform distribution.

The expected value is 1/3 and associated variance 1/18.

More research here finds the following more precise commentary:

Note that X − Y will only have a triangular distribution if b − a = d − c (that is, the joint support is a square interval), otherwise it will have a trapezoidal distribution.

Note: I am looking at the problem from the perspective that the data may consist inherently of samples taken from, say, a Uniform Distribution (hence, the non-traditional analysis). This may be representative of your data upon excluding your reported presence 'of many ones'.

$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.