-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 220
/
tidystats_infer.Rmd
448 lines (327 loc) · 10.5 KB
/
tidystats_infer.Rmd
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
324
325
326
327
328
329
330
331
332
333
334
335
336
337
338
339
340
341
342
343
344
345
346
347
348
349
350
351
352
353
354
355
356
357
358
359
360
361
362
363
364
365
366
367
368
369
370
371
372
373
374
375
376
377
378
379
380
381
382
383
384
385
386
387
388
389
390
391
392
393
394
395
396
397
398
399
400
401
402
403
404
405
406
407
408
409
410
411
412
413
414
415
416
417
418
419
420
421
422
423
424
425
426
427
428
429
430
431
432
433
434
435
436
437
438
439
440
441
442
443
444
445
446
447
448
# 统计推断 {#tidystats-infer}
```{r, include=FALSE}
knitr::opts_chunk$set(
echo = TRUE,
warning = FALSE,
message = FALSE,
fig.showtext = TRUE
)
```
Statistical Inference: A Tidy Approach
## 案例1:你会给爱情片还是动作片高分?
```{r infer-1, out.width = '65%', fig.align='left', echo = FALSE}
knitr::include_graphics("images/imdb.png")
```
这是一个关于电影评分的数据集[^2],
[^2]: <https://github.com/hadley/ggplot2movies/blob/master/R/movies.R>
```{r infer-2}
library(tidyverse)
d <- ggplot2movies::movies
d
```
数据集包含58788 行 和 24 变量
| variable | description |
|:------------|:-----------------|
| title | 电影名 |
| year | 发行年份 |
| budget | 预算金额 |
| length | 电影时长 |
| rating | 平均得分 |
| votes | 投票人数 |
| r1-10 | 各分段投票人占比 |
| mpaa | MPAA 分级 |
| action | 动作片 |
| animation | 动画片 |
| comedy | 喜剧片 |
| drama | 戏剧 |
| documentary | 纪录片 |
| romance | 爱情片 |
| short | 短片 |
```{r infer-3, eval=FALSE, include=FALSE}
d %>%
rowwise() %>%
mutate(
t = sum(c_across(starts_with("r")))
)
```
我们想看下爱情片与动作片(不是爱情动作片)的平均得分是否显著不同。
- 首先我们简单的整理下数据,主要是剔除既是爱情片又是动作片的电影
```{r infer-4}
movies_genre_sample <- d %>%
select(title, year, rating, Action, Romance) %>%
filter(!(Action == 1 & Romance == 1)) %>%
mutate(genre = case_when(
Action == 1 ~ "Action",
Romance == 1 ~ "Romance",
TRUE ~ "Neither"
)) %>%
filter(genre != "Neither") %>%
select(-Action, -Romance) %>%
group_by(genre) %>%
#slice_sample(n = 34) %>% # sample size = 34
slice_head(n = 34) %>%
ungroup()
movies_genre_sample
```
- 先看下图形
```{r infer-5, message=FALSE, warning=FALSE}
movies_genre_sample %>%
ggplot(aes(x = genre, y = rating)) +
geom_boxplot() +
geom_jitter()
```
- 看下两种题材电影评分的分布
```{r infer-6}
movies_genre_sample %>%
ggplot(mapping = aes(x = rating)) +
geom_histogram(binwidth = 1, color = "white") +
facet_grid(vars(genre))
```
- 统计两种题材电影评分的均值
```{r infer-7}
summary_ratings <- movies_genre_sample %>%
group_by(genre) %>%
summarize(
mean = mean(rating),
std_dev = sd(rating),
n = n()
)
summary_ratings
```
### 传统的基于频率方法的t检验
假设:
- 零假设:
- $H_0: \mu_{1} - \mu_{2} = 0$
- 备选假设:
- $H_A: \mu_{1} - \mu_{2} \neq 0$
两种可能的结论:
- 拒绝 $H_0$
- 不能拒绝 $H_0$
```{r infer-8}
t_test_eq <- t.test(rating ~ genre,
data = movies_genre_sample,
var.equal = TRUE
) %>%
broom::tidy()
t_test_eq
```
```{r infer-9}
t_test_uneq <- t.test(rating ~ genre,
data = movies_genre_sample,
var.equal = FALSE
) %>%
broom::tidy()
t_test_uneq
```
### infer:基于模拟的检验
所有的假设检验都符合这个框架[^2]:
[^2]: <http://allendowney.blogspot.com/2016/06/there-is-still-only-one-test.html>
```{r infer-10, out.width = '85%', fig.align='left', echo = FALSE, fig.cap = "Hypothesis Testing Framework"}
knitr::include_graphics("images/downey.png")
```
- 实际观察的差别
```{r infer-11}
library(infer)
obs_diff <- movies_genre_sample %>%
specify(formula = rating ~ genre) %>%
calculate(
stat = "diff in means",
order = c("Romance", "Action")
)
obs_diff
```
- 模拟
```{r infer-12}
null_dist <- movies_genre_sample %>%
specify(formula = rating ~ genre) %>%
hypothesize(null = "independence") %>%
generate(reps = 5000, type = "permute") %>%
calculate(
stat = "diff in means",
order = c("Romance", "Action")
)
head(null_dist)
```
- 可视化
```{r infer-13}
null_dist %>%
visualize()
```
```{r infer-14}
null_dist %>%
visualize() +
shade_p_value(obs_stat = obs_diff, direction = "both")
# shade_p_value(bins = 100, obs_stat = obs_diff, direction = "both")
```
- 计算p值
```{r infer-15}
pvalue <- null_dist %>%
get_pvalue(obs_stat = obs_diff, direction = "two_sided")
pvalue
```
- 结论
<!-- less_than_significance_text <- glue::glue( -->
<!-- "`p_value < 0.05`, 那我们有足够的证据证明,H0不成立,即爱情电影和动作电影的评分均值存在**显著差异**,具体来说,动作电影的平均评分要比爱情电影低些。" -->
<!-- ) -->
<!-- greater_then_significance_text <- glue::glue( -->
<!-- "`p_value > 0.05`,不能拒绝 H0,即我们没有足够的证据证明爱情电影和动作电影的评分均值存在**显著差异**。" -->
<!-- ) -->
在构建的虚拟($\Delta = 0$)的平行世界里,出现实际观察值(`r obs_diff$stat`)的概率为(`r pvalue$p_value`)。 如果以(p \< 0.05)为标准,我们看到`p_value < 0.05`, 那我们有足够的证据证明,H0不成立,即爱情电影和动作电影的评分均值存在**显著差异**,具体来说,动作电影的平均评分要比爱情电影低些。
## 案例2: 航天事业的预算有党派门户之见?
美国国家航空航天局的预算是否存在党派门户之见?
```{r infer-16}
gss <- read_rds("./demo_data/gss.rds")
gss %>%
select(NASA, party) %>%
count(NASA, party) %>%
head(8)
```
```{r infer-17}
gss %>%
ggplot(aes(x = party, fill = NASA)) +
geom_bar()
```
假设:
- 零假设 $H_0$:
- 不同党派对预算的态度的构成比(TOO LITTLE, ABOUT RIGHT, TOO MUCH) 没有区别
- 备选假设 $H_a$:
- 不同党派对预算的态度的构成比(TOO LITTLE, ABOUT RIGHT, TOO MUCH) 存在区别
两种可能的结论:
- 拒绝 $H_0$
- 不能拒绝 $H_0$
### 传统的方法
```{r infer-18}
chisq.test(gss$party, gss$NASA)
```
或者
```{r infer-19}
gss %>%
chisq_test(NASA ~ party) %>%
dplyr::select(p_value) %>%
dplyr::pull()
```
### infer:Simulation-based tests
```{r infer-20}
obs_stat <- gss %>%
specify(NASA ~ party) %>%
calculate(stat = "Chisq")
obs_stat
```
```{r infer-21}
null_dist <- gss %>%
specify(NASA ~ party) %>% # (1)
hypothesize(null = "independence") %>% # (2)
generate(reps = 5000, type = "permute") %>% # (3)
calculate(stat = "Chisq") # (4)
null_dist
```
```{r infer-22}
null_dist %>%
visualize() +
shade_p_value(obs_stat = obs_stat, method = "both", direction = "right")
```
```{r infer-23}
null_dist %>%
get_pvalue(obs_stat = obs_stat, direction = "greater")
```
看到 `p_value > 0.05`,不能拒绝 $H_0$,我们没有足够的证据证明党派之间有显著差异
```{r infer-24, out.width = '50%', fig.align='center', echo = FALSE}
knitr::include_graphics("images/fail_to_reject_you.png")
```
### using `ggstatsplot::ggbarstats()`
```{r}
library(ggstatsplot)
gss %>%
ggbarstats(
x = party,
y = NASA
)
```
## 案例3:原住民中的女学生多?
案例 `quine` 数据集有 146 行 5 列,包含学生的生源、文化、性别和学习成效,具体说明如下
- Eth: 民族背景:原住民与否 (是"A"; 否 "N")
- Sex: 性别
- Age: 年龄组 ("F0", "F1," "F2" or "F3")
- Lrn: 学习者状态(平均水平 "AL", 学习缓慢 "SL")
- Days:一年中缺勤天数
```{r infer-25}
td <- MASS::quine %>%
as_tibble() %>%
mutate(
across(c(Sex, Eth), as_factor)
)
td
```
从民族背景有两组(A, N)来看,性别为 F 的占比 是否有区别?
```{r infer-26}
td %>% count(Eth, Sex)
```
### 传统方法
```{r infer-27}
prop.test(table(td$Eth, td$Sex), correct = FALSE)
```
### 基于模拟的方法
被解释变量 sex 中F的占比,解释变量中两组(A,N)
```{r infer-28}
obs_diff <- td %>%
specify(Sex ~ Eth, success = "F") %>%
calculate(
stat = "diff in props",
order = c("A", "N")
)
obs_diff
```
```{r infer-29}
null_distribution <- td %>%
specify(Sex ~ Eth, success = "F") %>%
hypothesize(null = "independence") %>%
generate(reps = 5000, type = "permute") %>%
calculate(stat = "diff in props", order = c("A", "N"))
```
```{r infer-30}
null_distribution %>%
visualize()
```
```{r infer-31}
pvalue <- null_distribution %>%
get_pvalue(obs_stat = obs_diff, direction = "both")
pvalue
```
```{r infer-32}
null_distribution %>%
get_ci(level = 0.95, type = "percentile")
```
## 宏包`infer`
我比较喜欢[infer](https://github.com/tidymodels/infer)宏包的[设计思想](http://allendowney.blogspot.com/2016/06/there-is-still-only-one-test.html),它把统计推断分成了四个步骤
```{r infer-33, out.width = '70%', fig.align='center', echo = FALSE}
knitr::include_graphics("images/infer-ht-diagram.png")
```
下图可以更好的帮助我们理解infer的工作流程
```{r infer-34, out.width = '70%', fig.align='center', echo = FALSE}
knitr::include_graphics("images/infer_workflow.jpeg")
```
- `specify()` 指定解释变量和被解释变量 (`y ~ x`)
- `hypothesize()` 指定**零假设** (比如, `independence`= `y` 和 `x` 彼此独立)
- `generate()` 从基于零假设的平行世界中抽样:
- 指定每次重抽样的类型,通俗点讲就是数据洗牌,重抽样`type = "bootstrap"` (有放回的),对应的零假设往往是null = "point" ; 重抽样`type = "permuting"` (无放回的),对应的零假设往往是null = "independence", 指的是y和x之间彼此独立的,因此抽样后会重新排列,也就说原先 value1-group1 可能变成了value1-group2,(因为我们假定他们是独立的啊,这种操作,也不会影响y和x的关系)
- 指定多少组 (`reps = 1000`)
- `calculate()` 计算每组(`reps`)的统计值 (`stat = "diff in props"`)
- `visualize()` 可视化,对比零假设的分布与实际观察值.
下面是我自己对重抽样的理解
```{r infer-35, out.width = '70%', fig.align='center', echo = FALSE}
knitr::include_graphics("images/Resampling.jpg")
```
## 更多
更多统计推断的内容可参考
- <http://infer.netlify.com>
- <https://moderndive.netlify.com/index.html>
- <https://moderndive.com/index.html>
- <https://github.com/tidymodels/infer>
```{r infer-36, echo = F}
# remove the objects
# rm(list=ls())
rm(d, gss, movies_genre_sample, null_dist, null_distribution, obs_diff, obs_stat, pvalue, summary_ratings, t_test_eq, t_test_uneq, td)
```
```{r infer-37, echo = F, message = F, warning = F, results = "hide"}
pacman::p_unload(pacman::p_loaded(), character.only = TRUE)
```