When are random data not random, or is the PTP test useful?

7Citations
Citations of this article
117Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Recently, empirical evidence was presented that the permutation tail probability (PTP) test has extremely low discriminatory power when assessing character covariance in phylogenetic data based on bootstrap measures of confidence. Here we are concerned with the problem of using one statistical approach, especially when applied to empirical data, to judge the performance of another. Applying an appropriate statistical approach, we statistically demonstrated that the PTP test is extremely weak in detecting the absence of character covariation. In addition, we show that PTP is highly dependent on the number of terminals and the proportion of character states in phylogenetic matrices. In conclusion, we advocate the use of simulation studies when testing the performance of statistical tools applied to phylogenetic data. © 2000 The Willi Hennig Society.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Peres-Neto, P. R., & Marques, F. (2000). When are random data not random, or is the PTP test useful? Cladistics, 16(4), 420–424. https://doi.org/10.1006/clad.2000.0140

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free