Re: R-alpha: `classical' tests for R

Peter Dalgaard BSA (
07 Nov 1996 20:26:06 +0100

Subject: Re: R-alpha: `classical' tests for R
From: Peter Dalgaard BSA <>
Date: 07 Nov 1996 20:26:06 +0100
In-Reply-To: Kurt Hornik's message of Thu, 7 Nov 1996 16:10:42 +0100
Message-Id: <>

Kurt Hornik <> writes:

> Attached are drafts of the following classical tests for R:
> 	chisq.test
> 	cor.test
> 	kruskal.test
> 	mcnemar.test
> 	var.test
> 	wilcox.test

May your god go with you... I needed those for my teaching!
> They should do the same as their S counterparts, with 3 differences:
> * The rank-based tests do not adjust for ties

We'll want to have that sooner or later. Only a few days ago, I needed
Spearman's rho for a 3x3 table. (Seemed about the only sensible thing
to do with a grand total of 20 obs.)

> I am looking forward to feedback, hopefully there are not too many
> errors.

OK. From brief look through them:

1. The normal approx for Spearman's rho is not the same as in Siegels
book (he uses the standard t transformation r * sqrt((n-2)/(1-r^2)) as
a t on n - 2 df)

2. The Kendall statistic uses an order n^2 algorithm. This will cause
grief first time some on tries to calculate tau from a thousand
observations. Is it really necessary? 
> Code for binom.test, friedman.test and prop.test is under way.

and fisher.test? (dead easy, as far as my memory goes)

   O__  ---- Peter Dalgaard             Blegdamsvej 3  
  c/ /'_ --- Dept. of Biostatistics     2200 Cph. N   
 (*) \(*) -- University of Copenhagen   Denmark      Ph: (+45) 35327918
~~~~~~~~~~ - (             FAX: (+45) 35327907
r-testers mailing list -- To (un)subscribe, send
subscribe	or	unsubscribe
(in the "body", not the subject !)  To: