Hi all,
If I run LDA on the same data (2-class classification) with default(no
priors specified in the lda function) vs. "prior=c(0.5, 0.5)", the results
are different.
The (0.5, 0.5) priors give better 1-classify-to-1 rate, and the proportional
priors(default, no priors specified in the lda function) give better
0-classify-to-0 rate, for both training and testing data sets.
However, if I run QDA on the same data (2-class classification) with
default(no priors specified in the lda function) vs. "prior=c(0.5, 0.5)",
the results are the same,
i.e. the confusion tables are completely the same for two types of priors, I
even tried "qda" function with "prior=c(0.3, 0.7)" and other values, the
confusion tables are still the same...
What might be the problem?
Thanks a lot!
[[alternative HTML version deleted]]
______________________________________________
R-help@stat.math.ethz.ch mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help
PLEASE do read the posting guide! http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html
