Other Measures of Dependence Among Random Variables
The information given by a correlation coefficient is not enough to define the dependence structure between random variables. The correlation coefficient completely defines the dependence structure only in very particular cases, for example when the distribution is a multivariate normal distribution. (See diagram above.) In the case of elliptical distributions it characterizes the (hyper-)ellipses of equal density, however, it does not completely characterize the dependence structure (for example, a multivariate t-distribution's degrees of freedom determine the level of tail dependence).
Distance correlation and Brownian covariance / Brownian correlation were introduced to address the deficiency of Pearson's correlation that it can be zero for dependent random variables; zero distance correlation and zero Brownian correlation imply independence.
The correlation ratio is able to detect almost any functional dependency, and the entropy-based mutual information, total correlation and dual total correlation are capable of detecting even more general dependencies. These are sometimes referred to as multi-moment correlation measures, in comparison to those that consider only second moment (pairwise or quadratic) dependence.
The polychoric correlation is another correlation applied to ordinal data that aims to estimate the correlation between theorised latent variables.
One way to capture a more complete view of dependence structure is to consider a copula between them.
Read more about this topic: Correlation And Dependence
Famous quotes containing the words measures, dependence, random and/or variables:
“To have the fear of God before our eyes, and, in our mutual dealings with each other, to govern our actions by the eternal measures of right and wrong:MThe first of these will comprehend the duties of religion;Mthe second, those of morality, which are so inseparably connected together, that you cannot divide these two tables ... without breaking and mutually destroying them both.”
—Laurence Sterne (1713–1768)
“... the whole Wilsonian buncombe ... its ideational hollowness, its ludicrous strutting and bombast, its heavy dependence upon greasy and meaningless words, its frequent descents to mere sound and fury, signifying nothing.”
—H.L. (Henry Lewis)
“Novels as dull as dishwater, with the grease of random sentiments floating on top.”
—Italo Calvino (1923–1985)
“The variables of quantification, ‘something,’ ‘nothing,’ ‘everything,’ range over our whole ontology, whatever it may be; and we are convicted of a particular ontological presupposition if, and only if, the alleged presuppositum has to be reckoned among the entities over which our variables range in order to render one of our affirmations true.”
—Willard Van Orman Quine (b. 1908)