Normalisation or Standardisation for detecting outlier? - statistics

When to use min max scaling that is normalisation and when to use standardisation that is using z score for data pre-processing ?
I know that normalisation brings down the range of feature to 0 to 1, and z score bring downs to -3 to 3, but am unsure when to use one of the two technique for detecting the outliers in data?

Let us briefly agree on the terms:
The z-score tells us how many standard deviations a given element of a sample is away from the mean.
The min-max scaling is the method of rescaling a range of measurements the interval [0, 1].
By those definitions, z-score usually spans an interval much larger than [-3,3] if your data follows a long-tailed distribution. On the other hand, a plain normalization does indeed limit the range of the possible outcomes, but will not help you help you to find outliers, since it just bounds the data.
What you need for outlier dedetction are thresholds above or below which you consider a data point to be an outlier. Many programming languages offer Violin plots or Box plots which nicely show your data distribution. The methods behind plots implement a common choice of thresholds:
Box and whisker [of the box plot] plots quartiles, and the band inside the box is always the second quartile (the median). But the ends of the whiskers can represent several possible alternative values, among them:
the minimum and maximum of all of the data [...]
one standard deviation above and below the mean of the data
the 9th percentile and the 91st percentile
the 2nd percentile and the 98th percentile.
All data points outside the whiskers of the box plots are plotted as points and considered outliers.

Related

bollinger bands versus statistics: is 1 standard deviation supposed to be split into two halves by it's mean? or top and bottom bands from mean?

I have a question about how bollinger bands are plotted in relation to statistics. In statistics, once a standard deviation is calculated from a mean of a set of numbers, shouldn't interpreting a 1 standard deviation be done so that you divide this number is half, and plot each half above and below the mean? By doing so, you can then determine whether or not it's data points fall within this 1 standard deviation.
Then, correct me if I am wrong, but aren't bollinger bands NOT calculated this way?? Instead, it takes a 1 standard deviation (if you have set it to 1) and plots the WHOLE value both above and below the mean (not splitting in two), thereby doubling the size of this standard-deviation?
Bollinger bands loosely state that that 68% of data falls within the 1st band, 1 standard deviation (loosely because the empirical rule in statistics requires that distributions be normal distributions which most often stock prices are not). However if this empirical rule is from statistics where 1 standard deviation is split in half, that means that applying a 68% probability in to an entire bollinger band is wrong. ??? is this correct??
You can modify the deviation multiples to suite your purpose, you can use 0.5 for example.

Convert GMM-UBM scores to equicalent accuracy percent

I have constructed a GMM-UBM model for the speaker recognition purpose. The output of models adapted for each speaker some scores calculated by log likelihood ratio. Now I want to convert these likelihood scores to equivalent number between 0 and 100. Can anybody guide me please?
There is no straightforward formula. You can do simple things like
prob = exp(logratio_score)
but those might not reflect the true distribution of your data. The computed probability percentage of your samples will not be uniformly distributed.
Ideally you need to take a large dataset and collect statistics on what acceptance/rejection rate do you have for what score. Then once you build a histogram you can normalize the score difference by that spectrogram to make sure that 30% of your subjects are accepted if you see the certain score difference. That normalization will allow you to create uniformly distributed probability percentages. See for example How to calculate the confidence intervals for likelihood ratios from a 2x2 table in the presence of cells with zeroes
This problem is rarely solved in speaker identification systems because confidence intervals is not what you want actually want to display. You need a simple accept/reject decision and for that you need to know the amount of false rejects and accept rate. So it is enough to find just a threshold, not build the whole distribution.

Averaging many curves with different x and y values

I have several curves that contain many data points. The x-axis is time and let's say I have n curves with data points corresponding to times on the x-axis.
Is there a way to get an "average" of the n curves, despite the fact that the data points are located at different x-points?
I was thinking maybe something like using a histogram to bin the values, but I am not sure which code to start with that could accomplish something like this.
Can Excel or MATLAB do this?
I would also like to plot the standard deviation of the averaged curve.
One concern is: The distribution amongst the x-values is not uniform. There are many more values closer to t=0, but at t=5 (for example), the frequency of data points is much less.
Another concern. What happens if two values fall within 1 bin? I assume I would need the average of these values before calculating the averaged curve.
I hope this conveys what I would like to do.
Any ideas on what code I could use (MATLAB, EXCEL etc) to accomplish my goal?
Since your series' are not uniformly distributed, interpolating prior to computing the mean is one way to avoid biasing towards times where you have more frequent samples. Note that by definition, interpolation will likely reduce the range of your values, i.e. the interpolated points aren't likely to fall exactly at the times of your measured points. This has a greater effect on the extreme statistics (e.g. 5th and 95th percentiles) rather than the mean. If you plan on going this route, you'll need the interp1 and mean functions
An alternative is to do a weighted mean. This way you avoid truncating the range of your measured values. Assuming x is a vector of measured values and t is a vector of measurement times in seconds from some reference time then you can compute the weighted mean by:
timeStep = diff(t);
weightedMean = timeStep .* x(1:end-1) / sum(timeStep);
As mentioned in the comments above, a sample of your data would help a lot in suggesting the appropriate method for calculating the "average".

how to plot mean and standard deviation of multiple measures in gnuplot

I'd like to plot mean and standard deviation of multiple measures in one Gnuplot, if possible.
For example, object A and B has measures of lengths and weights like this (CSV format):
length,weight
100.0,0.1
100.5,0.12
98.8,0.09
100.1,0.11
Is it possible to plot this in a single figure with good visibility, i.e., the length is at the magnitude of 100, while the weight is at 0.1? I don't want the logarithmic way because in my real data, it doesn't make sense to logarithmize them.
Yerrorlines seems an option, but can histogram do this too?
Anyone knows how to do so in Gnuplot?
Thanks!

How to use Excel column chart for datasets that have very different scales

There are 2 datasets that have values in the interval [0; 1]. I need to visualize these 2 datasets in Excel as a column chart. The problem is that some data points have values 0.0001, 0.0002, and other data point have values 0.8, 0.9, etc. So, the difference is hugde, and therefore it´s impossible to see data points with small values. What could be the solution? Should I use logarithmic scale? I appreciate any example.
Two possible ways below
Graph the smaller data set as a second series against a right hand Y axis (with same ratio from min to max as left hand series)
Multiply the smaller data set by 1000 and compare the multiplied data set to the larger one
Note that a log scale will give negative results given you are working with fractions, so that isn't really an option

Resources