Some studies used correlation analysis to shed light on the scale of correlation between the various dimensions used in ROSE (Gafoor and Smitha 2012).
To assess expression conservation, we would suggest the use of correlations instead of Euclidean distance because 1) they show agreements between different computational models; 2) unlike Euclidian distance, the scale of correlation ([−1, 1]) is not affected by different degrees of freedom.
The PMFG is not a threshold network, and we consider it here because threshold methods might not be able to take into account the heterogeneity of similarities, or influences, that are typically present at different scales of correlation in complex systems.
Additionally, the scale of correlation coefficients RCT and RTN is in the same scale of h-values.
(a), Columns (left to right): schematic diagram of model, a typical activity pattern, a representative correlation pattern (Pearson's correlation), correlation fractures, and the spatial scale of correlations for the value of heterogeneity of connections, H, used (open symbol) and for varying H (closed symbols).
In fact, to characterize the scale of correlations perpendicular to the growing direction, the correlation frequency can be used.
It was found that the e-folding scales of correlations were 30.8, 7.5, and 4.8 km for the rain-free, weak rain, and heavy rain areas, respectively.
However, we believe that indications on possible linkages and time scales of correlations can be extracted from the present simulations.
Overall satisfaction and overall experiences were moderately to strongly correlated to the scales (range of correlation coefficients, 0.24 0.59), with all correlations significant at the p<0.001 level.
