Tal Galili wrote: > Hi Ben, > I just wished to give a small remark about your claim: > "it's best not to consider hypothesis testing (statistical significance) and > AIC in the same analysis." > > Since in the case of forward selection for orthogonal matrix's, it can be > shown that AIC is like using a P to enter rule of 0.16. For further > reference see:page 3 of: "A SIMPLE FORWARD SELECTION PROCEDURE BASED ON > FALSE DISCOVERY RATE CONTROL" BY YOAV BENJAMINI AND YULIA GAVRILOV, > http://projecteuclid.org/DPubS?service=UI&version=1.0&verb=Display&handle=euclid.aoas/1239888367 > >
Haven't read the paper yet, but I would say that makes sense -- > pchisq(3.84,1,lower.tail=FALSE) [1] 0.05004352 > pchisq(2,1,lower.tail=FALSE) [1] 0.1572992 -- Ben Bolker Associate professor, Biology Dep't, Univ. of Florida bol...@ufl.edu / www.zoology.ufl.edu/bolker GPG key: www.zoology.ufl.edu/bolker/benbolker-publickey.asc
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
______________________________________________ R-help@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.
