You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
I played around with both MI-nodes and I have a few theory questions (I hope you can remember):
when would I need to change the method and what does the bias result value tell me
what does the sigma result value tell me
when would I change the log-value
And one question concerning the 'Group MI' node:
I had expected, the MI between two groups gives an idea how similar the histograms are. I created a dummy dataset, 3000 entries for 'library with gaussian data (m=0, sd = 1) and 100 entries 'control' with the same gaussian parameters. I would expect a high MI, as both histograms should be very similar (shapewise). Instead, I get a low value. I made another test with 3000 entries for each group and the value is still low. But if I sort values within the groups from low to high, I get a high MI. From the calculation point it makes sense (as it is based on the join histogram). But I don't get how it could be useful to find out whether one group carries information the reference does not (as mentioned in the help of that node).
Any help to understand these nodes is appreciated :-)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
MI between X and Y reaches maximum if there is a bijective relation between the two variables (i.e. dependent)
Concerning your questions:
when would I need to change the method and what does the bias result value tell me?
The bias is the difference between expected value and estimated value (see wikipedia). So the unbiased method tries to compensate for the bias, subtracting the bias from the estimate.
MSSE (Mean Square Error estimate) further transforms the initial unbiased estimate. What that means in details you will need to dive into the literature and make a few more tests.
what does the sigma result value tell me
That is the MI's standard error
when would I change the log-value
The log base can be understood as the unit of measurement. Common choices are 'e' (nats), 2 (bit) and 10 (Hartley)
Concerning your experiment:
What is low?
The problem with MI is that it heavily depends on the binning and the maximum MI may be different for different parameters. So the first thing to try is to add a case with very different distributions to you experiment and compare the MI values of both cases.
Thanks a lot for all you answers! That helps already.
Concerning my test: I will link a workflow which calculates the MI for 8 different conditions
library 3000 values, control 3000 values OR library 3000 values, control 100 values
per group sorted values OR unsorted
library and control get values from the same distribution (m=0, sd = 0) OR library distribution (m=0, sd =1) and control distribution (m=10, sd =1) differ
I used biased calculation but the relation of the 8 MI-values is more or less the same for unbiased calculation (though different range).
Would you mind to have a look at it if these values meets your expectations?
@Meyenhofer
I played around with both MI-nodes and I have a few theory questions (I hope you can remember):
And one question concerning the 'Group MI' node:
I had expected, the MI between two groups gives an idea how similar the histograms are. I created a dummy dataset, 3000 entries for 'library with gaussian data (m=0, sd = 1) and 100 entries 'control' with the same gaussian parameters. I would expect a high MI, as both histograms should be very similar (shapewise). Instead, I get a low value. I made another test with 3000 entries for each group and the value is still low. But if I sort values within the groups from low to high, I get a high MI. From the calculation point it makes sense (as it is based on the join histogram). But I don't get how it could be useful to find out whether one group carries information the reference does not (as mentioned in the help of that node).
Any help to understand these nodes is appreciated :-)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: