The Cove Business Standards Discussion Forums More Free Files Forum Discussion Thread Post Attachments Listing Cove Discussion Forums Main Page
UL - Underwriters Laboratories - Health Sciences
Go Back   The Elsmar Cove Business Systems and Standards Discussion Forums > Manufacturing, Service, and Business Systems Processes > Reliability Analysis - Predictions, Testing and Standards
Forum Username

Elsmar Cove Forum Visitor Notice(s)

Wooden Line

Total Variation in Data - Overall Importance of the Principal Components


Elsmar XML RSS Feed
Elsmar Cove Forum RSS Feed

Monitor the Elsmar Forum
Sponsor Links




Courtesy Quick Links


Links that Cove visitors will find useful in your quest for knowledge:

International Standards Bodies - World Wide Standards Bodies

ASQ - American Society for Quality

International Standards Organization - ISO Standards and Information

Howard's
International Quality Services


Marcelo Antunes'
SQR Consulting, and
Medical Devices Expert Forum


Bob Doering
Bob Doering's Blogs and,
Correct SPC - Precision Machining


Ajit Basrur
Claritas Consulting, LLC


NIST's Engineering Statistics Handbook

IRCA - International Register of Certified Auditors

SAE - Society of Automotive Engineers

Quality Digest

IEST - Institute of Environmental Sciences and Technology


Some Related Topic Tags (Not all threads are Tagged)
business management system, data analysis
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Rate Thread Content Display Modes
  Post Number #1  
Old 9th April 2017, 06:17 AM
Preetica

 
 
Total Posts: 1
Let Me Help You Total Variation in Data - Overall Importance of the Principal Components

As the system was not accepting spaces I gave comma instead of space.

Table 6.1 indicates the overall importance of the principal components. It
displays for each component ph the standard deviation, given by
√λh, the proportion of variance explained by each component, equal to λh/j λj, and the cumulative proportion explained by the first components up to ph included.The analysis shows that the first two components explain 84% of the total variation in the data while the first 5 explain 94%.

Table 6.1 Overall importance of principal components in the mtcars dataset
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,Comp.1,,,,,,,,,Comp.2,,,,,,Comp.3,,,,,Comp.4
Standard deviation,,,,,,2.5706809,,,,1.6280258,,,0.7919578,,0.5192277
Proportion of variance,,0.6007637,,,,0.2409516,,,0.0570179,,0.0245088
Cumulative proportion,,0.6007637,,,,0.8417153,,,0.8987332,,0.9232420

,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,Comp.5,,,,,,,,,Comp.6,,,,,,Comp.7,,,,,,Comp.8
Standard deviation,,,,,,0.4727061,,,0.4599957,,,,0.3677798,,,0.3505730
Proportion of variance,,0.0203137,,,0.0192360,,,,0.0122965,,,0.0111728
Cumulative proportion,,0.9435558,,,0.9627918,,,0.9750883,,,0.9862612

,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,Comp.9,,,,,,,,,Comp.10,,,,Comp.11
Standard deviation,,,,,,,0.2775727,,,,0.2281127,,,0.1484735
Proportion of variance,,,0.0070042,,,,0.0047304,,,0.0020040
Cumulative proportion,,,0.9932654,,,,,,0.9979959,,,,1.0000000



Can someone please the formula for total variation in data, how did we get the values 84% and 94%

Table 6.2 shows the values of the coefficients whj = uhj ; equivalently, it
indicates the eigenvectors of the covariance matrix V. The first component,
which alone explains 60% of the variance, is negatively correlated with the
attributes {cyl, disp,wt, carb}, whose meaning is explained in Appendix B,
while it is positively correlated with all the other attributes.

Table 6.2 Principal component coefficients for the mtcars dataset
,,,,,,,,,,Comp.1,,,,,,,Comp.2,,,,Comp.3,,,,Comp.4,,,Comp.5,,,,Comp.6
mpg,,,,,0.363,,,,,,−0.226,,,,,,−0.103,,,,,−0.109,,,,,0.368,,,,,,,0.754
cyl,,,,,−0.374,,,,,,−0.175,,,,,,,,0.169,,,,,,,0.231,,,−0.846
disp,, −0.368,,,,,,,,,0.257,,,,,,−0.394,,,,,−0.336,,,,,,0.214,,,,,,,0.198
hp,,,,,,−0.33,,,,,,,,−0.249,,,,,,,,0.14,,,,,,,−0.54,,,,,,,0.222,,,,,−0.576
drat,,,,,,0.294,,,,,,,−0.275,,,,,,,0.161,,,,,,,,0.855,,,,,0.244,,,,,,−0.101
wt,,,,,,−0.346,,,,,,,,,0.143,,,,,,,0.342,,,,,,,0.246,,,,,−0.465,,,,,, 0.359
qsec,,,,,,0.2,,,,,,,,,,,,0.463,,,,,,,0.403,,,,,,,0.165,,,,−0.33,,,,,,,,0.232
vs,,,,,,,,,0.307,,,,,,,,,0.232,,,,,,,0.429,,,,,,,−0.215,,−0.6,,,,,,,,,0.194
am,,,,,,,0.235,,,,,,,,−0.429,,,,,,−0.206,,,,,,−0.571,,−0.587,,,,,−0.178
gear,,,,,,0.207,,,,,,,,−0.462,,,,,,,,0.29,,,,,,,−0.265,,−0.244,,,,,,,0.605
carb,,,,−0.214,,,,,,,,−0.414,,,,,,,0.529,,,,,,−0.127,,,,0.361,,,,,,,,0.184

,,,,,,,,,,,Comp.7,,,,,Comp.8,,,,,Comp.9,,,,,Comp.10,,,Comp.11
mpg,,,,,0.236,,,,,,,,,0.139,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,0.125
cyl,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,0.141
disp,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,−0.661
hp,,,,,,,0.248,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,0.256
drat
wt,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,0.567
qsec,,,,,−0.528,,,,, −0.271,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,−0.181
vs,,,,,,,,−0.266,,,,,,,,0.359,,,,, −0.159
am
gear,,,,,−0.336,,,,,,−0.214
carb,,,,,−0.175,,,,,,,,,,0.396,,,,,,,,0.171,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,−0.32

Can anyone please explain how the corelation is calculated like how did we get the value 60%

Thanks in advance

Last edited by Preetica; 9th April 2017 at 06:40 AM.

Sponsored Links
  Post Number #2  
Old 20th April 2017, 09:54 AM
Miner's Avatar
Miner

 
 
Total Posts: 4,005
Look! Re: Total Variation in Data - Overall Importance of the Principal Components

This is pretty advanced statistics for this forum. I recommend asking this question on Talkstats.com. Talkstats is a statistics discussion forum, and I have seen PCA and Factor Analysis discussed periodically.
Thanks to Miner for your informative Post and/or Attachment!
Sponsored Links

Reply

Lower Navigation Bar
Go Back   The Elsmar Cove Business Systems and Standards Discussion Forums > Manufacturing, Service, and Business Systems Processes > Reliability Analysis - Predictions, Testing and Standards

Bookmarks



Visitors Currently Viewing this Thread: 1 (0 Registered Visitors (Members) and 1 Unregistered Guest Visitors)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Forum Search
Display Modes Rate Thread Content
Rate Thread Content:

Forum Posting Settings
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Emoticons are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Similar Discussion Threads
Discussion Thread Title Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post or Poll Vote
Ppk & Cpk - Within Subgroup Variation is always smaller than Total Variation Stevenli Capability, Accuracy and Stability - Processes, Machines, etc. 18 12th February 2014 12:31 AM
Components of Variation not within or between Brad Gover Quality Tools, Improvement and Analysis 4 12th November 2011 09:52 AM
Total Tolerance Method vs. Total Variation Method - Measurement System Analysis ram4302 Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 1 11th July 2010 01:16 PM
Process Variation and Total Variation - Relationship and Definitions 9876543219 Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 9 5th March 2009 05:07 AM
Gage R&R - Tolerance vs. Total Variation - Process Variation vs. Gage Variation Jrodrigu Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 2 29th August 2002 08:09 AM



The time now is 09:54 AM. All times are GMT -4.
Your time zone can be changed in your UserCP --> Options.


 
 


NOTE: This forum uses "Cookies" - A Peachfarm Internet Property