2014
DOI: 10.1038/ncomms5114
|View full text |Cite|
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A fast and unbiased procedure to randomize ecological binary matrices with fixed row and column totals

Abstract: A well-known problem in numerical ecology is how to recombine presence-absence matrices without altering row and column totals. A few solutions have been proposed, but all of them present some issues in terms of statistical robustness (that is, their capability to generate different matrix configurations with the same probability) and their performance (that is, the computational effort that they require to generate a null matrix). Here we introduce the 'Curveball algorithm', a new procedure that differs from … Show more

Help me understand this report
View preprint versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
206
0
1

Year Published

2015
2015
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 201 publications
(207 citation statements)
references
References 27 publications
(60 reference statements)
0
206
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…For larger matrices, the mixing time needs to be estimated. This can be performed by measuring the perturbation of each matrix in the Markov chain with respect to the initial matrix [17]. The mixing time is approximated by the step at which the perturbation score stabilizes.…”
Section: Numerical Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 3 more Smart Citations
“…For larger matrices, the mixing time needs to be estimated. This can be performed by measuring the perturbation of each matrix in the Markov chain with respect to the initial matrix [17]. The mixing time is approximated by the step at which the perturbation score stabilizes.…”
Section: Numerical Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…O ur proof gives a theoretical justification for using the Curveball algorithm instead o f the more fam iliar sw itching method. Both sam ple uniform ly, but the C urveball algorithm is much faster [17].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…If recovery technique is biasing the assemblage then we hypothesize that the hand collected and 6.4 mm specimens should not be a nested subset of the 3.2 mm-recovered specimens. An open-source program NeD was used to quantify the NODF (nested overlap and decreasing fill) index and temperature (Strona et al 2014). Nestedness values range between 0, a perfectly nested fauna, and 100, a perfectly random fauna for temperature, but opposite for NODF (100 is a perfectly nested fauna) (Almeida-Neto et al 2008;Guimaraes and Guimaraes 2006).…”
Section: Recovery Technique Fragmentation and Sample Sizementioning
confidence: 99%