Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Analysis demonstrates improved exploratory performance in compositional datasets using scale-invariant correspondence analysis techniques.
Correspondence analysis is a dimension reduction technique for visualizing a non-negative matrix N=(nij) of size I×J, particularly contingency tables or compositional datasets, but it depends on the row and column marginals of N. Three complementary transformations of the data T(N)=(T(ainijbj)) render CA of T(N) invariant for any ai>0 and bj>0: first, Greenacre’s scale-invariant approach, valid for positive data; second, Goodman’s marginal-free correspondence analysis, valid for positive or moderately sparse data; third, correspondence analysis of the sign-transformed matrix, sign(N)=(sign(nij)), valid for sparse or extremely sparse data. We demonstrate these three methods on four real-world datasets with varying levels of sparsity to compare their exploratory performance.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Choulakian et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: