# Bootstrapping or permuting as resampling methods for correlations?

I have many variables ( ~2000 and 320 samples) and I have found the correlation coefficient for each unqiue pair of these variables through Spearmann (underlying data does not have normal distribution). As some outliers can affect the correlation coefficient value, I am considering bootstrapping and/or permutation testing to be able to better understand whether there is any significant difference betweeen the original coefficient value and the one generated through a resampling method. I am unsure of a few things;

1)I realise (without resampling methods) that my null hypothesis would be that when considering a pair of variables X and Y , H0:ρ(X,Y)=0, whilst alternative H1:ρ(X,Y) ≠ 0. But following the resampling, my null hypothesis is that there is no difference between the original coefficient value and the one generated from resampling? As ultimately, this is what I need to test.

2)as both approaches are quite time intensive due to the number of variables involved - would one approach be more statistically valid than the other?

3)In addition, lastly, if I were to go with a bootstrapping approach and calculated 95% confidence intervals (CI), based on my null hypothesis above following resampling, if this interval contained 0, I presume this is indicative that there is no significant difference between my original and bootstrapped statistic?

• Do you mean that you've computed the rank correlations for all ${2000 \choose 2} \approx 2,000,000$ pairs of $2,000$ variables. These on a sample of size $320$? Mar 17, 2023 at 20:53
• @dipetkov yes, that's correct. I will be transferring my analysis to a high performance computing cluster (using R within this), as even using a 10 core cluster within R on my 11 core laptop, this takes 12 hours (before permuting or bootstrapping). Mar 18, 2023 at 11:46
• Even though the computations can be accomplished, I would be asking myself what, if anything, I would learn from 95%-level confidence intervals when there are 2 million of them. What is the purpose of these calculations? How are you going to control the type I error? Mar 18, 2023 at 12:32
• @dipetkov that's a good point. I guess it comes back to the discussion around p values vs confidence intervals (e.g. towardsdatascience.com/…), but perhaps calculating p values and correcting for multiple testing (i.e Bonferroni or FDR) might be the way forward. Mar 18, 2023 at 16:04
• With this number of comparisons, I would say FDR makes more sense. Mar 18, 2023 at 16:13