It's a long way to the top (if you wanna biplot): a back-to-basics perspective on the implementation of principal component biplots in R.

Q1 Mathematics
Quality & Quantity Pub Date : 2026-01-01 Epub Date: 2025-07-26 DOI:10.1007/s11135-025-02266-9
Ettore Settanni, Jagjit Singh Srai
{"title":"It's a long way to the top (if you wanna biplot): a back-to-basics perspective on the implementation of principal component biplots in R.","authors":"Ettore Settanni, Jagjit Singh Srai","doi":"10.1007/s11135-025-02266-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Principal Component Analysis and biplots are so well-established and readily implemented that it is just too tempting to take for granted their internal workings. In this note we compare how PCA and biplots are implemented in the R language for statistical computing, leveraging a software-agnostic understanding of computational building-blocks that both techniques have in common. We do so with a view to illustrating discrepancies that users might find elusive, as these arise from seemingly innocuous computational choices made under the hood. Wider implications are derived from a simplified case based on real-world clinical trial supply chains data. By getting back to basics, the proposed evaluation grid elevates aspects that are usually disregarded, including relationships that should hold if the computational rationale underpinning each technique is followed correctly. Strikingly, what is expected from these equivalences rarely follows without caveats from the output of specific implementations alone.</p>","PeriodicalId":49649,"journal":{"name":"Quality & Quantity","volume":"60 1","pages":"1173-1213"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2026-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12920800/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Quality & Quantity","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-025-02266-9","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/7/26 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Mathematics","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Principal Component Analysis and biplots are so well-established and readily implemented that it is just too tempting to take for granted their internal workings. In this note we compare how PCA and biplots are implemented in the R language for statistical computing, leveraging a software-agnostic understanding of computational building-blocks that both techniques have in common. We do so with a view to illustrating discrepancies that users might find elusive, as these arise from seemingly innocuous computational choices made under the hood. Wider implications are derived from a simplified case based on real-world clinical trial supply chains data. By getting back to basics, the proposed evaluation grid elevates aspects that are usually disregarded, including relationships that should hold if the computational rationale underpinning each technique is followed correctly. Strikingly, what is expected from these equivalences rarely follows without caveats from the output of specific implementations alone.

这是一个很长的路要走到顶端(如果你想要双标图):在R中实现主成分双标图的回归基本视角。
主成分分析和双标图是如此完善和容易实现,以至于太容易把它们的内部工作视为理所当然。在这篇文章中,我们比较了如何在R语言中实现PCA和双标图来进行统计计算,利用对这两种技术共同的计算构建块的软件无关的理解。我们这样做的目的是为了说明用户可能会发现难以捉摸的差异,因为这些差异来自于在引擎盖下做出的看似无害的计算选择。基于现实世界临床试验供应链数据的简化案例产生了更广泛的影响。通过回归基础,建议的评估网格提升了通常被忽视的方面,包括如果正确遵循支撑每种技术的计算基本原理应该保持的关系。引人注目的是,如果没有特定实现输出的警告,从这些等价中所期望的东西很少会出现。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Quality & Quantity
Quality & Quantity 管理科学-统计学与概率论
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
276
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Quality and Quantity constitutes a point of reference for European and non-European scholars to discuss instruments of methodology for more rigorous scientific results in the social sciences. In the era of biggish data, the journal also provides a publication venue for data scientists who are interested in proposing a new indicator to measure the latent aspects of social, cultural, and political events. Rather than leaning towards one specific methodological school, the journal publishes papers on a mixed method of quantitative and qualitative data. Furthermore, the journal’s key aim is to tackle some methodological pluralism across research cultures. In this context, the journal is open to papers addressing some general logic of empirical research and analysis of the validity and verification of social laws. Thus The journal accepts papers on science metrics and publication ethics and, their related issues affecting methodological practices among researchers. Quality and Quantity is an interdisciplinary journal which systematically correlates disciplines such as data and information sciences with the other humanities and social sciences. The journal extends discussion of interesting contributions in methodology to scholars worldwide, to promote the scientific development of social research.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书