Abstract
Subcompositional coherence is a fundamental property of Aitchison’s approach to compositional data analysis and is the principal justification for using ratios of components. We maintain, however, that lack of subcompositional coherence (i.e., incoherence) can be measured in an attempt to evaluate whether any given technique is close enough, for all practical purposes, to being subcompositionally coherent. This opens up the field to alternative methods that might be better suited to cope with problems such as data zeros and outliers while being only slightly incoherent. The measure that we propose is based on the distance measure between components. We show that the two-part subcompositions, which appear to be the most sensitive to subcompositional incoherence, can be used to establish a distance matrix that can be directly compared with the pairwise distances in the full composition. The closeness of these two matrices can be quantified using a stress measure that is common in multidimensional scaling, providing a measure of subcompositional incoherence. The approach is illustrated using power-transformed correspondence analysis, which has already been shown to converge to log-ratio analysis as the power transform tends to zero.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Aitchison J (1983) Principal component analysis of compositional data. Biometrika 70:57–65
Aitchison J (1986) The statistical analysis of compositional data. Chapman & Hall, London (reprinted in 2003 with additional material by Blackburn Press)
Aitchison J (1990) Relative variation diagrams for describing patterns of compositional variability. Math Geol 22:487–511
Aitchison J, Greenacre M (2002) Biplots for compositional data. Appl Stat 51:375–392
Baxter MJ, Cool HEM, Heyworth MP (1990) Principal component and correspondence analysis of compositional data: some similarities. J Appl Stat 17:229–235
Borg I, Groenen P (2005) Modern multidimensional scaling, 2nd edn. Springer, New York
Box GEP, Cox DR (1964) An analysis of transformations (with discussion). J R Stat Soc B 35:473–479
Chayes F (1960) On correlation between variables of constant sum. J Geophys Res 65:4185–4193
Cuadras C, Cuadras D, Greenacre M (2006) A comparison of methods for analyzing contingency tables. Commun Stat, Simul Comput 35:447–459
Greenacre M (1984) Theory and applications of correspondence analysis. Academic Press, London
Greenacre M (2007) Correspondence analysis in practice, 2nd edn. Chapman & Hall/CRC Press, London
Greenacre M (2008) La práctica del análisis de correspondencias. Fundación BBVA, Madrid
Greenacre M (2009) Power transformations in correspondence analysis. Comput Stat Data Anal 53:3107–3116
Greenacre M (2010) Log-ratio analysis is a limiting case of correspondence analysis. Math Geosci 42:129–134
Greenacre M, Lewi P (2009) Distributional equivalence and subcompositional coherence in the analysis of compositional data, contingency tables and ratio-scale measurements. J Classif 26:29–54
Martín-Fernández JA, Barceló-Vidal C, Pawlowsky-Glahn V (2003) Dealing with zeros and missing values in compositional data sets. Math Geol 35:253–278
Pawlowsky-Glahn V, Egozcue J, Tolosana-Delgado R (2007) Lecture notes on compositional data analysis. http://dugi-oc.udg.edu/handle/10256/297. Accessed 15 May 2011
Thioulouse J, Dray S (2007) Interactive multivariate data analysis in R with the ade4 and ade4TkGUI packages. J Stat Soft. http://www.jstatsoft.org/v22/i05/paper. Accessed 15 May 2011
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Greenacre, M. Measuring Subcompositional Incoherence. Math Geosci 43, 681–693 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11004-011-9338-5
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11004-011-9338-5