Jolliffe I. Principal Component Analysis (2ed., Springer, 2002)(518s)
Jolliffe I. Principal Component Analysis (2ed., Springer, 2002)(518s) Jolliffe I. Principal Component Analysis (2ed., Springer, 2002)(518s)
11.1. Rotation of Principal Components 277Table 11.1. Unrotated and rotated loadings for components 3 and 4: artisticqualities data.PC3 PC4 RPC3 RPC4Composition −0.59 −0.41 −0.27 0.66Drawing 0.60 −0.50 0.78 −0.09Colour 0.49 −0.22 0.53 0.09Expression 0.23 0.73 −0.21 0.74Percentage of 10.0 7.3 9.3 8.0total variationtogether they account for 83% of the total variation. Rotating them maylose information on individual dominant sources of variation. On the otherhand, the last two PCs have similar eigenvalues and are candidates for rotation.Table 11.1 gives unrotated (PC3, PC4) and rotated (RPC3, RPC4)loadings for these two components, using varimax rotation and the normalizationconstraints a ′ k a k = 1. Jolliffe (1989) shows that using alternativerotation criteria to varimax makes almost no difference to the rotated loadings.Different normalization constraints also affect the results very little.Using ã ′ kãk = l k gives vectors of rotated loadings whose angles with thevectors for the constraint a ′ k a k =1areonly6 ◦ and 2 ◦ .It can be seen from Table 11.1 that rotation of components 3 and 4 considerablysimplifies their structure. The rotated version of component 4 isalmost a pure contrast between expression and composition, and component3 is also simpler than either of the unrotated components. As well asillustrating rotation of components with similar eigenvalues, this examplealso serves as a reminder that the last few, as well as the first few, componentsare sometimes of interest (see Sections 3.1, 3.7, 6.3, 8.4–8.6, 9.1 and10.1).In such cases, interpretation of the last few components may have asmuch relevance as interpretation of the first few, and for the last fewcomponents close eigenvalues are more likely.11.1.2 One-step Procedures Using Simplicity CriteriaKiers (1993) notes that even when a PCA solution is rotated to simplestructure, the result may still not be as simple as required. It may thereforebe desirable to put more emphasis on simplicity than on variancemaximization, and Kiers (1993) discusses and compares four techniquesthat do this. Two of these explicitly attempt to maximize one of the standardsimplicity criteria, namely varimax and quartimax respectively, overall possible sets of orthogonal components, for a chosen number of componentsm. A third method divides the variables into non-overlapping clusters
278 11. Rotation and Interpretation of Principal Componentsand associates exactly one component with each cluster. The criterion tobe optimized is the sum over variables of squared loadings for each variablefor the single component associated with that variable’s cluster. The finalmethod is similar to the one that maximizes the quartimax criterion, butit relaxes the requirement of orthogonality of components.Gains in simplicity achieved by any of the methods are paid for by aloss of variance explained compared to rotated PCA, but none of the fourmethods explicitly takes into account the desirability of minimizing thevariance lost. Kiers (1993) investigates the trade-off between simplicity gainand variance loss for the four methods in a simulation study. He finds thatneither of the first two methods offers any advantage over rotated PCA.The third and fourth methods show some improvement over rotated PCAin recovering the simple structures that are built into the simulated data,and the fourth is better than the third in terms of retaining variance.Two of the disadvantages of standard rotation noted earlier are the loss ofthe successive optimization property and the possible sensitivity of the resultsto the choice of m. All four techniques compared by Kiers (1993) sharethese disadvantages. We now describe a method that avoids these drawbacksand explicitly takes into account both variance and simplicity. LikeKiers’ (1993) methods it replaces the two stages of rotated PCA by a singlestep. Linear combinations of the p variables are successively found thatmaximize a criterion in which variance is combined with a penalty functionthat pushes the linear combination towards simplicity. The method isknown as the Simplified Component Technique (SCoT) (Jolliffe and Uddin,2000).Let c ′ k x i be the value of the kth simplified component (SC) for the ithobservation. Suppose that Sim(c k ) is a measure of simplicity for the vectorc k , for example the varimax criterion, and Var(c ′ kx) denotes the samplevariance c ′ k Sc k of c ′ kx. Then SCoT successively maximizes(1 − ψ)Var(c ′ kx)+ψSim(c k ) (11.1.6)subject to c ′ k c k = 1 and (for k ≥ 2, h
- Page 258 and 259: 9.3. Canonical Correlation Analysis
- Page 260 and 261: 9.3. Canonical Correlation Analysis
- Page 262 and 263: 9.3. Canonical Correlation Analysis
- Page 264 and 265: 10.1. Detection of Outliers Using P
- Page 266 and 267: 10.1. Detection of Outliers Using P
- Page 268 and 269: 10.1. Detection of Outliers Using P
- Page 270 and 271: 10.1. Detection of Outliers Using P
- Page 272 and 273: 10.1. Detection of Outliers Using P
- Page 274 and 275: 10.1. Detection of Outliers Using P
- Page 276 and 277: 10.1. Detection of Outliers Using P
- Page 278 and 279: 10.1. Detection of Outliers Using P
- Page 280 and 281: 10.2. Influential Observations in a
- Page 282 and 283: 10.2. Influential Observations in a
- Page 284 and 285: 10.2. Influential Observations in a
- Page 286 and 287: 10.2. Influential Observations in a
- Page 288 and 289: 10.2. Influential Observations in a
- Page 290 and 291: 10.3. Sensitivity and Stability 259
- Page 292 and 293: 10.3. Sensitivity and Stability 261
- Page 294 and 295: 10.4. Robust Estimation of Principa
- Page 296 and 297: 10.4. Robust Estimation of Principa
- Page 298 and 299: 10.4. Robust Estimation of Principa
- Page 300 and 301: 11Rotation and Interpretation ofPri
- Page 302 and 303: 11.1. Rotation of Principal Compone
- Page 304 and 305: oot of the corresponding eigenvalue
- Page 306 and 307: 11.1. Rotation of Principal Compone
- Page 310 and 311: 11.2. Alternatives to Rotation 279w
- Page 312 and 313: 11.2. Alternatives to Rotation 281F
- Page 314 and 315: 11.2. Alternatives to Rotation 283F
- Page 316 and 317: 11.2. Alternatives to Rotation 285T
- Page 318 and 319: 11.2. Alternatives to Rotation 287T
- Page 320 and 321: 11.2. Alternatives to Rotation 289A
- Page 322 and 323: 11.2. Alternatives to Rotation 291
- Page 324 and 325: 11.3. Simplified Approximations to
- Page 326 and 327: 11.3. Simplified Approximations to
- Page 328 and 329: 11.4. Physical Interpretation of Pr
- Page 330 and 331: 12Principal Component Analysis forT
- Page 332 and 333: 12.1. Introduction 301series is alm
- Page 334 and 335: 12.2. PCA and Atmospheric Time Seri
- Page 336 and 337: 12.2. PCA and Atmospheric Time Seri
- Page 338 and 339: and a typical row of the matrix is1
- Page 340 and 341: 12.2. PCA and Atmospheric Time Seri
- Page 342 and 343: 12.2. PCA and Atmospheric Time Seri
- Page 344 and 345: 12.2. PCA and Atmospheric Time Seri
- Page 346 and 347: 12.2. PCA and Atmospheric Time Seri
- Page 348 and 349: 12.3. Functional PCA 317A key refer
- Page 350 and 351: 12.3. Functional PCA 319The sample
- Page 352 and 353: 12.3. Functional PCA 321speed (mete
- Page 354 and 355: 12.3. Functional PCA 323of the data
- Page 356 and 357: 12.3. Functional PCA 325subject to
278 11. Rotation and Interpretation of <strong>Principal</strong> <strong>Component</strong>sand associates exactly one component with each cluster. The criterion tobe optimized is the sum over variables of squared loadings for each variablefor the single component associated with that variable’s cluster. The finalmethod is similar to the one that maximizes the quartimax criterion, butit relaxes the requirement of orthogonality of components.Gains in simplicity achieved by any of the methods are paid for by aloss of variance explained compared to rotated PCA, but none of the fourmethods explicitly takes into account the desirability of minimizing thevariance lost. Kiers (1993) investigates the trade-off between simplicity gainand variance loss for the four methods in a simulation study. He finds thatneither of the first two methods offers any advantage over rotated PCA.The third and fourth methods show some improvement over rotated PCAin recovering the simple structures that are built into the simulated data,and the fourth is better than the third in terms of retaining variance.Two of the disadvantages of standard rotation noted earlier are the loss ofthe successive optimization property and the possible sensitivity of the resultsto the choice of m. All four techniques compared by Kiers (1993) sharethese disadvantages. We now describe a method that avoids these drawbacksand explicitly takes into account both variance and simplicity. LikeKiers’ (1993) methods it replaces the two stages of rotated PCA by a singlestep. Linear combinations of the p variables are successively found thatmaximize a criterion in which variance is combined with a penalty functionthat pushes the linear combination towards simplicity. The method isknown as the Simplified <strong>Component</strong> Technique (SCoT) (<strong>Jolliffe</strong> and Uddin,2000).Let c ′ k x i be the value of the kth simplified component (SC) for the ithobservation. Suppose that Sim(c k ) is a measure of simplicity for the vectorc k , for example the varimax criterion, and Var(c ′ kx) denotes the samplevariance c ′ k Sc k of c ′ kx. Then SCoT successively maximizes(1 − ψ)Var(c ′ kx)+ψSim(c k ) (11.1.6)subject to c ′ k c k = 1 and (for k ≥ 2, h