Timeline for Tags around categorical data coding / representation
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
20 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 26, 2017 at 18:31 | vote | accept | ttnphns | ||
| Jul 26, 2017 at 16:43 | answer | added | ttnphns | timeline score: 0 | |
| Jul 25, 2017 at 20:28 | history | edited | amoeba |
edited tags
|
|
| Jul 1, 2017 at 22:56 | answer | added | amoeba | timeline score: 11 | |
| Jun 30, 2017 at 14:49 | history | edited | ttnphns | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
bring back attention to the question
|
| Mar 16, 2017 at 15:44 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://meta.stats.stackexchange.com/ with https://stats.meta.stackexchange.com/
|
|
| Mar 8, 2017 at 17:52 | comment | added | ttnphns | @amoeba, Anyways, I've seen somewhere in meta here on on SO that a moderator can abolish the tie (mapping). At least this is ought to be done, for the future, for me. (If after it we need to do some "back" retagging manually - we could do it. In particualrly, I could find time(s) re-tag those ~ 500 questions, perhaps). | |
| Mar 8, 2017 at 14:25 | comment | added | amoeba | @ttnphns As far as I know, this is impossible in principle. One can delete the synonym mapping, but one can't undo the tag changes that have previously happened via this synonym mapping... | |
| Mar 7, 2017 at 11:07 | comment | added | ttnphns |
@whuber, will you, can you undo the past synonymization of [dummy-variables] to [categorical-data]?
|
|
| Mar 6, 2017 at 18:56 | history | edited | ttnphns | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 808 characters in body
|
| Mar 6, 2017 at 18:34 | comment | added | ttnphns | amoeba, It was very imprudent decision of @whuber to absorb [dummy-variables] by [categorical-data]. (Even analytically, it was wrong: dummy predictors enter the fitting algorithm as numeric values, they aren't "categorical" anymore.) I would say this should be undone at any "price" - if there price at all. | |
| Mar 6, 2017 at 14:43 | comment | added | amoeba | One should note that dummy-variables -> categorical-data synonym exists since 2011 and has led to 350+ tag renames (one can see it here stats.stackexchange.com/tags/synonyms). Also, there are 500+ questions with "dummy variable" in their body. This makes me wonder whether removing this synonym mapping is the best course of action (even though I said so above)... We are not going to re-tag 300-500 old questions. | |
| Mar 6, 2017 at 12:57 | history | edited | gung - Reinstate Monica | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
light editing
|
| Mar 6, 2017 at 12:28 | comment | added | mdewey | The distinction between contrasts and contrast variables seems a very subtle one which may only interest a small number of users so I would not want to support that part of the proposal. +1 for the rest | |
| Mar 6, 2017 at 11:35 | comment | added | ttnphns | P.S. My own background is possibly different somewhat to Scortchi's. I did encounter "dummy variables" in his wide sense (= "my" contrast variables), but much more seldom than "dummy variables" as =indicator (binary) type. | |
| Mar 6, 2017 at 11:29 | comment | added | ttnphns |
I agree with Scortchi here This is exactly where @Scortchi and I don't agree. I see "dummy variables" as only the binary (1 0), specific type. This is principal issue of terminology. Either the audience decide to follow "Scortchi's" or "my" proposal of definition of "dummy". If Scortchi's - then we don't need [contrast-variables], but then must play back and recover [indicator-variables] (=one-hot) to be a separate tag. You see, this type is so widely used that it deserves a tag.
|
|
| Mar 6, 2017 at 11:23 | comment | added | ttnphns |
@amoeba, I think they are didactically distinct, theoretically tied. Contrast is a set of coefficients creating/defining the now being compared groups out of categorical factor(s). Contrast variables are data values, codes. Since we have tag dummy-variables for data but define it narrowly (as indicator type contrast variables), we have to compensate and create the wider tag contrast-variables. Term "contrast variables" is not my invention, it encounters in literature.
|
|
| Mar 6, 2017 at 11:22 | comment | added | amoeba | Also, I agree with Scortchi here (stats.stackexchange.com/a/125612/28666) that "dummy variable" can have values other than 0 and 1, and so Helmert contrast coding variables can be described as "dummy variables" too. | |
| Mar 6, 2017 at 11:16 | comment | added | amoeba | I agree that [dummy-variables] should not be a synonym of [categorical-data]. I agree that [indicator-variables] should be a synonym of [dummy-variables]. But I don't think that having [contrast-variables] and contrasts as two separate tags is a good idea. It's not clear to me how these two tags should be separated in usage. | |
| Mar 6, 2017 at 11:11 | history | asked | ttnphns | CC BY-SA 3.0 |