There is no "perhaps" about it. Nonsense phrases like "similar to logit, where I dont [sic] lose normality of the data" that lead into off-topic discussions of why one introduces transformations in the first place are perfect examples of why questions like this belong on a statistical theory discussion forum like StackExchange rather than here where the topic is the R language.
On January 20, 2019 6:02:15 AM PST, Adrian Johnson <oriolebaltim...@gmail.com> wrote: >Dear group, >My question, perhaps is more of a statistical question using R >I have a data matrix ( 400 x 400 normally distributed) with data >points ranging from -1 to +1.. >For certain clustering algorithms, I suspect the tight data range is >not helping resolving the clusters. > >Is there a way to transform the data something similar to logit, where >I dont lose normality of the data and yet I can better expand the data >ranges. > >Thanks >Adrian > >______________________________________________ >R-help@r-project.org mailing list -- To UNSUBSCRIBE and more, see >https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help >PLEASE do read the posting guide >http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html >and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code. -- Sent from my phone. Please excuse my brevity. ______________________________________________ R-help@r-project.org mailing list -- To UNSUBSCRIBE and more, see https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.
