# PMCC S1

Watch this threadPage 1 of 1

Go to first unread

Skip to page:

MathMeister

Badges:
10

Rep:

?
You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#1

Hello

Pearson's correlation coefficient between two variables is defined as the covariance of the two variables divided by the product of their standard deviations.

Why are Sxx and Syy different from the form of standard deviation?

I assume Syy is the same as Sxx just you act as if the y axis is the x axis and do SD normally...

Please help...

Pearson's correlation coefficient between two variables is defined as the covariance of the two variables divided by the product of their standard deviations.

Why are Sxx and Syy different from the form of standard deviation?

I assume Syy is the same as Sxx just you act as if the y axis is the x axis and do SD normally...

Please help...

0

reply

ztibor

Badges:
10

Rep:

?
You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#2

Report

#2

(Original post by

Hello

Pearson's correlation coefficient between two variables is defined as the covariance of the two variables divided by the product of their standard deviations.

Why are Sxx and Syy different from the form of standard deviation?

I assume Syy is the same as Sxx just you act as if the y axis is the x axis and do SD normally...

Please help...

**MathMeister**)Hello

Pearson's correlation coefficient between two variables is defined as the covariance of the two variables divided by the product of their standard deviations.

Why are Sxx and Syy different from the form of standard deviation?

I assume Syy is the same as Sxx just you act as if the y axis is the x axis and do SD normally...

Please help...

then this known as sample variance and deviation (Sxx Syy) against with the standard variance and deviation calculated from the continuous function of probability variable.

So the Sxx or Syy is only estimated standard deviation, that is they are estimators.

This estimation will be unbiased when calculating variance we divide by (n-1) and

not by n as at the standard variance.

0

reply

ghostwalker

Badges:
17

?
You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#3

Report

#3

(Original post by

Why are Sxx and Syy different from the form of standard deviation?

**MathMeister**)Why are Sxx and Syy different from the form of standard deviation?

The latter form (small s) is the variance, and the first form (large S) is n times that.

Does that cover it? If not can you elaborate on your question, as I won't have understood what you're getting at.

0

reply

MathMeister

Badges:
10

Rep:

?
You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#4

(Original post by

...

**ghostwalker**)...

What I understand is that the SD is an estimator of the deviation from the mean of a set of data points i.e how spread out from the mean they are...which is lest robust/ easier to use than the MAD.

I know that the PMCC measures the magnitude and direction of correlation.

I see that do determine how close together the variables (lets say x and y) are, you would use standard deviation to see how spread out they are (and therefore how correlated/ close together the line is) . You'd do this for x and y as you need to how spread out they are from both sides.

Please may you tell me whether this is true- and if so- explain why the equations for Sxx and Syy are not similar looking to the SD equation.

And please explain what the covariance is please.

0

reply

ghostwalker

Badges:
17

?
You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#5

Report

#5

(Original post by

Thank you.

What I understand is that the SD is an estimator of the deviation from the mean of a set of data points i.e how spread out from the mean they are...which is lest robust/ easier to use than the MAD.

I know that the PMCC measures the magnitude and direction of correlation.

I see that do determine how close together the variables (lets say x and y) are, you would use standard deviation to see how spread out they are (and therefore how correlated/ close together the line is) . You'd do this for x and y as you need to how spread out they are from both sides.

**MathMeister**)Thank you.

What I understand is that the SD is an estimator of the deviation from the mean of a set of data points i.e how spread out from the mean they are...which is lest robust/ easier to use than the MAD.

I know that the PMCC measures the magnitude and direction of correlation.

I see that do determine how close together the variables (lets say x and y) are, you would use standard deviation to see how spread out they are (and therefore how correlated/ close together the line is) . You'd do this for x and y as you need to how spread out they are from both sides.

Please may you tell me whether this is true- and if so- explain why the equations for Sxx and Syy are not similar looking to the SD equation.

And please explain what the covariance is please.

"In probability theory and statistics, covariance is a measure of how much two random variables change together. If the greater values of one variable mainly correspond with the greater values of the other variable, and the same holds for the smaller values, i.e., the variables tend to show similar behavior, the covariance is positive. In the opposite case, when the greater values of one variable mainly correspond to the smaller values of the other, i.e., the variables tend to show opposite behavior, the covariance is negative. The sign of the covariance therefore shows the tendency in the linear relationship between the variables. The magnitude of the covariance is not easy to interpret. The normalized version of the covariance, the correlation coefficient, however, shows by its magnitude the strength of the linear relation."

0

reply

davros

Badges:
16

Rep:

?
You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#6

Report

#6

(Original post by

Thank you.

What I understand is that the SD is an

**MathMeister**)Thank you.

What I understand is that the SD is an

**estimator**of the deviation from the mean of a set of data points i.e how spread out from the mean they are...which is lest robust/ easier to use than the MAD.Both SD and MAD are possible measures of average deviation from the mean, and I imagine in principle one could come up with a more complicated measure of deviation. But it's a mistake to think that there is one "true" deviation and everything else is an estimator of it. SD and MAD are possible measures of spread, just as mean, median and mode are possible candidates for an "average" i.e. typical value of a set of data.

The SD is usually easier to manipulate from a calculus point of view, although non-mathematicians (e.g. social scientists) would probably argue that MAD is simpler to calculate. So "easier" is subjective. Also not sure what you mean by "less robust" - this isn't really a mathematical term

0

reply

MathMeister

Badges:
10

Rep:

?
You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#7

(Original post by

...

**davros**)...

0

reply

davros

Badges:
16

Rep:

?
You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#8

Report

#8

(Original post by

Does the covariance measure how close together the line is? How strong the correlation is...

**MathMeister**)Does the covariance measure how close together the line is? How strong the correlation is...

0

reply

Badges:
10

Rep:

?
You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#9

(Original post by

See ghostwalker's quote from wikipedia - you need a normalized version to measure the strength of linear relationship

**davros**)See ghostwalker's quote from wikipedia - you need a normalized version to measure the strength of linear relationship

0

reply

X

Page 1 of 1

Go to first unread

Skip to page:

### Quick Reply

Back

to top

to top