Re: [R] hypergeometric vs fisher.test

2010-08-13 Thread TGS
"or an incompetent" Such harsh words Peter. You're not making this a friendly environment for people to ask questions. Is there a less competent attribute mailing list so that some of us don't offend you with our questions? On Aug 13, 2010, at 2:11 PM, Peter Dalgaard wrote: Andrea Franceschini

Re: [R] hypergeometric vs fisher.test

2010-08-13 Thread Peter Dalgaard
Andrea Franceschini wrote: > I ask the question also because I found this line in Wikipedia: > "The test (see above) based on the hypergeometric distribution > (hypergeometric test) is identical to the corresponding one-tailed > version of Fisher's exact test". > > Is this wrong ? May I kindly as

Re: [R] hypergeometric vs fisher.test

2010-08-13 Thread Andrea Franceschini
I ask the question also because I found this line in Wikipedia: "The test (see above) based on the hypergeometric distribution (hypergeometric test) is identical to the corresponding one-tailed version of Fisher's exact test". Is this wrong ? May I kindly ask a friendly explanation for not-exper

Re: [R] hypergeometric vs fisher.test

2010-08-13 Thread peter dalgaard
On Aug 13, 2010, at 3:47 PM, Andrea Franceschini wrote: > > Dear R team, > I have a simple question. > > I tried this command: > phyper(17,449,19551,181, FALSE) > [1] 1.47295e-07 > > and then I tried this command: > (fisher.test(matrix(c(17,449,181,19551),2,2), > alternative='greater'))$p.valu

[R] hypergeometric vs fisher.test

2010-08-13 Thread Andrea Franceschini
Dear R team, I have a simple question. I tried this command: phyper(17,449,19551,181, FALSE) [1] 1.47295e-07 and then I tried this command: (fisher.test(matrix(c(17,449,181,19551),2,2), alternative='greater'))$p.value [1] 3.693347e-06 Shouldn't be identical the results of the two commands ? Wh