View Single Post
  #9   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 03-07-2007, 11:49
Kevin Sevcik's Avatar
Kevin Sevcik Kevin Sevcik is online now
(Insert witty comment here)
FRC #0057 (The Leopards)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Rookie Year: 1998
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 3,665
Kevin Sevcik has a reputation beyond reputeKevin Sevcik has a reputation beyond reputeKevin Sevcik has a reputation beyond reputeKevin Sevcik has a reputation beyond reputeKevin Sevcik has a reputation beyond reputeKevin Sevcik has a reputation beyond reputeKevin Sevcik has a reputation beyond reputeKevin Sevcik has a reputation beyond reputeKevin Sevcik has a reputation beyond reputeKevin Sevcik has a reputation beyond reputeKevin Sevcik has a reputation beyond repute
Send a message via AIM to Kevin Sevcik Send a message via Yahoo to Kevin Sevcik
Re: Correlation Finding Software?

Quote:
Originally Posted by kramarczyk View Post
For the record I am not suggesting that excel's linear fit should be used as I have no idea what data is being worked with. The question was about finding correlation between data ranges in a spreadsheet. I was simply pointing out that excel has built in functions for that... I see no reason to reinvent the wheel if one is just trying to convert the data into information. However, if one is trying to learn about the technique then, yeah, grab a book.

I also found this page that gives the excel calcs for other trendlines... http://j-walk.com/ss/excel/tips/tip101.htm
Yeeesss... But, you see, everything Excel does is still basic single variable linear regression. You'll notice the formulas you linked to there are just a series of linear regressions on transformed data. If you need to do a logistic regression, you're flat out of luck. And if reality fundamentally depends on two independent variables, then you're unlikely to get any useful information out of Excel. Since variations in your data due to the second variable will mostly appear as so much noise if your regression only accounts for one variable. Unless you only look at data points where all other variables are the same, which isn't terribly useful. On the whole, you're much more likely to get useful information out of the data by actually, you know, doing statistics on it.
__________________
The difficult we do today; the impossible we do tomorrow. Miracles by appointment only.

Lone Star Regional Troubleshooter

Last edited by Kevin Sevcik : 03-07-2007 at 11:56.
Reply With Quote