Hey all, Matt Haberland has implemented Page's L test in the pull request https://github.com/scipy/scipy/pull/12531. I'd like to merge the PR, but Ralf has suggested that the name, `pagel`, is "a terrible name", and has suggested `page_test` or `page_l_test`. (See the comments at https://github.com/scipy/scipy/pull/12531#pullrequestreview-447123727.) Matt's reasoning for `pagel` is that it is consistent with the style used for many other tests in stats. I don't have a strong preference, and when that happens in such a case, I tend to go with the original author's preference. I think Ralf prefers to have "test" in the name. Some existing tests do, but many others don't. Anyone else have an opinion? Either about this specific case, or about the general question of objective criteria for a "good" name? Warren
Just a little more context - `page_l` was the original name, but I changed it for consistency with `kendalltau`, `spearmanr`, `pearsonr`, `johnsonsb`, `johnsonsu`, `mannwhitneyu`, and `friedmanchisquare`: surname adjoined with variable name. There are some functions that have a `_` after the surname, but they don't have the name of a variable after them; they're more of a description (e.g. `fisher_exact`, `yeojohnson_normmax`. Other statistical test names are here <https://docs.scipy.org/doc/scipy/reference/stats.html#statistical-tests>. And for completeness, Warren asked: "I'd like to merge this soon. Are you OK with pagel?" and Ralf's response was: "Sure. It's a terrible name, but at least it's consistent with the other terrible names - and page_l also won't tell anyone what the function does." I would suggest that ideas consider this test in the context of past and future hypothesis test names rather than singling out this one test. If we decide that we want to change the convention, that's fine, but I'd prefer that be a standard going forward. On Tue, Jan 5, 2021 at 8:53 AM Warren Weckesser <warren.weckesser@gmail.com> wrote:
Hey all,
Matt Haberland has implemented Page's L test in the pull request https://github.com/scipy/scipy/pull/12531. I'd like to merge the PR, but Ralf has suggested that the name, `pagel`, is "a terrible name", and has suggested `page_test` or `page_l_test`. (See the comments at https://github.com/scipy/scipy/pull/12531#pullrequestreview-447123727.) Matt's reasoning for `pagel` is that it is consistent with the style used for many other tests in stats. I don't have a strong preference, and when that happens in such a case, I tend to go with the original author's preference. I think Ralf prefers to have "test" in the name. Some existing tests do, but many others don't.
Anyone else have an opinion? Either about this specific case, or about the general question of objective criteria for a "good" name?
Warren _______________________________________________ SciPy-Dev mailing list SciPy-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/scipy-dev
-- Matt Haberland Assistant Professor BioResource and Agricultural Engineering 08A-3K, Cal Poly
On Tue, Jan 5, 2021 at 11:53 AM Warren Weckesser <warren.weckesser@gmail.com> wrote:
Hey all,
Matt Haberland has implemented Page's L test in the pull request https://github.com/scipy/scipy/pull/12531. I'd like to merge the PR, but Ralf has suggested that the name, `pagel`, is "a terrible name", and has suggested `page_test` or `page_l_test`. (See the comments at https://github.com/scipy/scipy/pull/12531#pullrequestreview-447123727.) Matt's reasoning for `pagel` is that it is consistent with the style used for many other tests in stats. I don't have a strong preference, and when that happens in such a case, I tend to go with the original author's preference. I think Ralf prefers to have "test" in the name. Some existing tests do, but many others don't.
Anyone else have an opinion? Either about this specific case, or about the general question of objective criteria for a "good" name?
Wikipedia suggests that it is also known as Page's trend test, which might make for a more informative function name. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Page%27s_trend_test -- Robert Kern
On Tue, Jan 5, 2021 at 12:10 PM Robert Kern <robert.kern@gmail.com> wrote:
On Tue, Jan 5, 2021 at 11:53 AM Warren Weckesser < warren.weckesser@gmail.com> wrote:
Hey all,
Matt Haberland has implemented Page's L test in the pull request https://github.com/scipy/scipy/pull/12531. I'd like to merge the PR, but Ralf has suggested that the name, `pagel`, is "a terrible name", and has suggested `page_test` or `page_l_test`. (See the comments at https://github.com/scipy/scipy/pull/12531#pullrequestreview-447123727.) Matt's reasoning for `pagel` is that it is consistent with the style used for many other tests in stats. I don't have a strong preference, and when that happens in such a case, I tend to go with the original author's preference. I think Ralf prefers to have "test" in the name. Some existing tests do, but many others don't.
Anyone else have an opinion? Either about this specific case, or about the general question of objective criteria for a "good" name?
Wikipedia suggests that it is also known as Page's trend test, which might make for a more informative function name.
Counterpoint: "The Page test is not a trend test" https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/cultevo/vignettes/page.test.html -- Robert Kern
IIUC this is a test of monotonicity, that is what is implied w/the colloquial expression “trending upward”, so I’m confused as to why this isn’t a trend. Perhaps the author has conflated the more specific “Linear trend”? It seems like a *monotone* test, maybe something that indicates monotone? (That would at least be descriptive) e.g. ‘page_monotone’, a ‘_test’ could be added if we want that part consistent but it’s a long name at that point. I could also see arguments for dropping ‘page’ from the name. The test isn’t a standard/ubiquitous one like t or binomial tests so the need for following a convention is less. Unless we want to match R in naming. My 2cents. -Lucas Roberts
On Jan 5, 2021, at 12:13 PM, Robert Kern <robert.kern@gmail.com> wrote:
On Tue, Jan 5, 2021 at 12:10 PM Robert Kern <robert.kern@gmail.com> wrote:
On Tue, Jan 5, 2021 at 11:53 AM Warren Weckesser <warren.weckesser@gmail.com> wrote:
Hey all,
Matt Haberland has implemented Page's L test in the pull request https://github.com/scipy/scipy/pull/12531. I'd like to merge the PR, but Ralf has suggested that the name, `pagel`, is "a terrible name", and has suggested `page_test` or `page_l_test`. (See the comments at https://github.com/scipy/scipy/pull/12531#pullrequestreview-447123727.) Matt's reasoning for `pagel` is that it is consistent with the style used for many other tests in stats. I don't have a strong preference, and when that happens in such a case, I tend to go with the original author's preference. I think Ralf prefers to have "test" in the name. Some existing tests do, but many others don't.
Anyone else have an opinion? Either about this specific case, or about the general question of objective criteria for a "good" name?
Wikipedia suggests that it is also known as Page's trend test, which might make for a more informative function name.
Counterpoint: "The Page test is not a trend test"
https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/cultevo/vignettes/page.test.html
-- Robert Kern _______________________________________________ SciPy-Dev mailing list SciPy-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/scipy-dev
On Tue, Jan 5, 2021 at 6:04 PM <rlucas7@vt.edu> wrote:
IIUC this is a test of monotonicity, that is what is implied w/the colloquial expression “trending upward”, so I’m confused as to why this isn’t a trend.
Perhaps the author has conflated the more specific “Linear trend”?
I think the point they are making is that the null hypothesis gets rejected for even a single treatment being (consistently) lower than the following one. Whereas one might expect a "trend" to span across the whole (or substantial part of) the treatment space. I'm afraid I don't care enough about this area of statistics to dive any deeper. I don't really mind one way or the other. I'd rather name it something that helps people find it even if some experts may quibble about the strict accuracy of the name. Some combination of `page` and `trend` seems to me to be better than just `page` or `pagel`. -- Robert Kern
On Jan 5, 2021, at 7:41 PM, Robert Kern <robert.kern@gmail.com> wrote:
On Tue, Jan 5, 2021 at 6:04 PM <rlucas7@vt.edu> wrote:
IIUC this is a test of monotonicity, that is what is implied w/the colloquial expression “trending upward”, so I’m confused as to why this isn’t a trend.
Perhaps the author has conflated the more specific “Linear trend”?
I think the point they are making is that the null hypothesis gets rejected for even a single treatment being (consistently) lower than the following one. Whereas one might expect a "trend" to span across the whole (or substantial part of) the treatment space. I'm afraid I don't care enough about this area of statistics to dive any deeper.
I don't really mind one way or the other. I'd rather name it something that helps people find it even if some experts may quibble about the strict accuracy of the name. Some combination of `page` and `trend` seems to me to be better than just `page` or `pagel`.
I concur.
-- Robert Kern _______________________________________________ SciPy-Dev mailing list SciPy-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/scipy-dev
On Wed, Jan 6, 2021 at 9:09 AM <rlucas7@vt.edu> wrote:
On Jan 5, 2021, at 7:41 PM, Robert Kern <robert.kern@gmail.com> wrote:
On Tue, Jan 5, 2021 at 6:04 PM <rlucas7@vt.edu> wrote:
IIUC this is a test of monotonicity, that is what is implied w/the colloquial expression “trending upward”, so I’m confused as to why this isn’t a trend.
Perhaps the author has conflated the more specific “Linear trend”?
I think the point they are making is that the null hypothesis gets rejected for even a single treatment being (consistently) lower than the following one. Whereas one might expect a "trend" to span across the whole (or substantial part of) the treatment space.
I'm afraid I don't care enough about this area of statistics to dive any deeper.
I don't really mind one way or the other. I'd rather name it something that helps people find it even if some experts may quibble about the strict accuracy of the name. Some combination of `page` and `trend` seems to me to be better than just `page` or `pagel`.
I concur.
I agree with "Some combination of `page` and `trend` seems to me to be better" I have seen "trend test" used in several cases for tests of equality with trending, ordered, monotonic alternatives. There might be other trend tests that end up in scipy.stats, so qualifying by "page" is appropriate. `page_l_test` is more like `mood`, not famous enough to remember what it does without looking it up. Aside In statsmodels I would use something that combines "rank" and "trend". (I ended up using `rank_compare_2indep` for my version of brunner_munzel test and statistic in statsmodels.) Josef
-- Robert Kern _______________________________________________ SciPy-Dev mailing list SciPy-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/scipy-dev
_______________________________________________ SciPy-Dev mailing list SciPy-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/scipy-dev
On 1/6/21, josef.pktd@gmail.com <josef.pktd@gmail.com> wrote:
On Wed, Jan 6, 2021 at 9:09 AM <rlucas7@vt.edu> wrote:
On Jan 5, 2021, at 7:41 PM, Robert Kern <robert.kern@gmail.com> wrote:
On Tue, Jan 5, 2021 at 6:04 PM <rlucas7@vt.edu> wrote:
IIUC this is a test of monotonicity, that is what is implied w/the colloquial expression “trending upward”, so I’m confused as to why this isn’t a trend.
Perhaps the author has conflated the more specific “Linear trend”?
I think the point they are making is that the null hypothesis gets rejected for even a single treatment being (consistently) lower than the following one. Whereas one might expect a "trend" to span across the whole (or substantial part of) the treatment space.
I'm afraid I don't care enough about this area of statistics to dive any deeper.
I don't really mind one way or the other. I'd rather name it something that helps people find it even if some experts may quibble about the strict accuracy of the name. Some combination of `page` and `trend` seems to me to be better than just `page` or `pagel`.
I concur.
I agree with "Some combination of `page` and `trend` seems to me to be better"
I have seen "trend test" used in several cases for tests of equality with trending, ordered, monotonic alternatives. There might be other trend tests that end up in scipy.stats, so qualifying by "page" is appropriate.
`page_l_test` is more like `mood`, not famous enough to remember what it does without looking it up.
Aside In statsmodels I would use something that combines "rank" and "trend". (I ended up using `rank_compare_2indep` for my version of brunner_munzel test and statistic in statsmodels.)
Josef
-- Robert Kern _______________________________________________ SciPy-Dev mailing list SciPy-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/scipy-dev
_______________________________________________ SciPy-Dev mailing list SciPy-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/scipy-dev
_______________________________________________ SciPy-Dev mailing list SciPy-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/scipy-dev
Thanks everyone. After reviewing the comments, it looks like `page_trend_test` is a good name (descriptive and recognizable, despite the technical issue with "trend"), so we'll go with that. Warren
participants (5)
-
josef.pktd＠gmail.com -
Matt Haberland -
rlucas7＠vt.edu -
Robert Kern -
Warren Weckesser