Hostname: page-component-5f745c7db-nzk4m Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-06T21:43:09.403Z Has data issue: true hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Taxicab Correspondence Analysis

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2025

V. Choulakian
V. Choulakian*
Affiliation:
Université de Moncton
*
Requests for reprints should be sent to V. Choulakian, Départment de Mathematiques/Statistiques, Université de Moncton, Moncton, NB, E1A 3F9, Canada. E-mail: choulav@umoncton.ca
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Taxicab correspondence analysis is based on the taxicab singular value decomposition of a contingency table, and it shares some similar properties with correspondence analysis. It is more robust than the ordinary correspondence analysis, because it gives uniform weights to all the points. The visual map constructed by taxicab correspondence analysis has a larger sweep and clearer perspective than the map obtained by correspondence analysis. Two examples are provided.

Keywords

singular value decompositionBenzécri et al.’s measure of influencecorrespondence analysisL1 normrobustness
Type
Original Paper
Information
Psychometrika , Volume 71 , Issue 2 , June 2006 , pp. 333 - 345
Copyright
Copyright © 2006 The Psychometric Society

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

This research was financed by the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada. The author thanks Serge Vienneau for his help regarding the graphical displays, and also thanks the editor, associate editor, and two reviewers for their constructive comments.

References

Arabie, P. (1991). Was Euclid an unnecessarily sophisticated psychologist?. Psychometrika, 56, 567–587.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Benzécri, J.-P.et al. (1973). Analyse des Données (vol. 2). Paris: Dunod.Google Scholar
Chauchat, J-H., & Risson, A. (1998). Bertin's graphics and multidimensional data analysis. In Blasius, J., Greenacre, M. (Eds.), Visualization of categorical data (pp. 37–45). New York: Academic Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Choulakian, V. (2004). A comparison of two methods of principal component analysis. In Antoch, J. (Eds.), COMPSTAT 2004 (pp. 793–798). Berlin: Physica-Verlag.Google Scholar
Choulakian, V. (2005). Transposition invariant principal component analysis in L1. Statistics & Probability Letters, 71, 23–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Choulakian, V. (2006). L 1-norm projection pursuit principal component analysis. Computational Statistics and Data Analysis, 50, 1391–1624.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chu, M.T., Funderlic, R.E., & Golub, G.H. (1995). A rank-one reduction formula and its applications to matrix factorizations. SIAM Review, 37, 512–530.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Leeuw, J., & Michailidis, G. (2004). Weber correspondence analysis. The one-dimensional case. Journal of Computational and Graphical Statistics, 13, 946–953.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gifi, A. (1990). Nonlinear multivariate analysis. Chichester UK: Wiley.Google Scholar
Greenacre, M.J. (1984). Theory and applications of correspondence analysis. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Heiser, W.J. (1987). Correspondence analysis with least absolute residuals. Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, 5, 337–356.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hubert, L., Meulman, J., & Heiser, W. (2000). Two purposes for matrix factorization: A historical appraisal. SIAM Review, 42, 68–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krause, E.F. (1986). Taxicab geometry: An adventure in non-Euclidean geometry. New York: Dover.Google Scholar
Michailidis, G., & De Leeuw, J. (2004). Homogeneity analysis using absolute deviations. Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, 48, 587–603.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nishisato, S. (1980). Analysis of categorical data: Dual scaling and its applications. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nishisato, S. (1984). Forced classification: A simple application of a quantification method. Psychometrika, 49, 25–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wold, H. (1966). Estimation of principal components and related models by iterative least squares. In Krishnaiah, P.R. (Eds.), Multivariate analysis (pp. 391–420). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar