Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

streamline default factor naming across qmethod #264

Closed
maxheld83 opened this issue Sep 2, 2015 · 1 comment
Closed

streamline default factor naming across qmethod #264

maxheld83 opened this issue Sep 2, 2015 · 1 comment

Comments

@maxheld83
Copy link
Collaborator

Here's a thought:

  • unrotated principal components -> PCi
  • automatically rotated principal components -> RCi (because those are actually no longer principal components, but just components)
  • manually rotated principal components -> mRCi

This would not make a huge difference, but it would be more strictly correct.

We could then (properly) reserve Fi for factors, if and when they are actually available via Centroid #15 or PAF #20 .

@maxheld83
Copy link
Collaborator Author

here's a thought how to go about this systematically / elegantly:

  • have qmethod() and all the downstream functions work entirely on indices, without relying on, or producing names
  • then always run q.fnames over the results to give names
    • either the automatically created, but appropriate names as in the above
    • or manually created names from q.fnames or q.mrot.do or wherever
  • implement names by taking them from the rot.mat and have them trickle down from there.

This might need a bit of refactoring though, not quite clear whether it's worth the effort.

Open question: how to deal with flagging; should that be in the names?

Properly implementing this might also require / should be done in tandem with #277

@maxheld83 maxheld83 modified the milestones: Backlog, 2.0 Sep 3, 2015
maxheld83 added a commit to maxheld83/qmethod that referenced this issue Sep 5, 2015
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants