An example to illustrate the use of HAMLET Joint Frequencies

The following example searches a file describing the HAMLET package for some of its main keywords with the following optional settings:


The output listing is as follows :-

 WORD-SEARCHING IS INSENSITIVE TO CASE.

 WORD COUNTS ............................................

  WORD          FREQUENCY  % VOCAB.  % TEXT  CONTEXT UNITS

 context*           39     11.02      0.97        31
 dimension*         18      5.08      0.45        16
 frequenc*          24      6.78      0.60        19
 hamlet             37     10.45      0.92        34
 joint              27      7.63      0.67        24
 MINISSA            12      3.39      0.30        11
 scaling            16      4.52      0.40        14
 text*              64     18.08      1.60        54
 vocabulary         28      7.91      0.70        25
 word*              89     25.14      2.22        59


 4011 words were read from the text file.
 354 of these were in the search list, and
 134 context-units were counted.

 JOINT FREQUENCIES ......................................

 for a FIXED CONTEXT LENGTH of 30 words:

                i         1       2       3       4       5       6       7       8       9
                  +-------------------------------------------------------------------------
 context*       1 |
 dimension*     2 |       6
 frequenc*      3 |      10       7
 hamlet         4 |       7       7       9
 joint          5 |      11       8      16      10
 MINISSA        6 |       4       6       4       7       6
 scaling        7 |       2       8       4       7       6       6
 text*          8 |      15       5       6      11      10       6       8
 vocabulary     9 |       5       1       6       8       5       2       2      11
 word*         10 |      14       5      10      13      15       4       6      29      16


 STANDARDISED JOINT INDEX VALUES ........................

 Jaccard coefficient - ignores joint non-occurrence

                i         1       2       3       4       5       6       7       8       9
                  +-------------------------------------------------------------------------
 context*       1 |
 dimension*     2 |    0.15
 frequenc*      3 |    0.25    0.25
 hamlet         4 |    0.12    0.16    0.20
 joint          5 |    0.25    0.25    0.59    0.21
 MINISSA        6 |    0.11    0.29    0.15    0.18    0.21
 scaling        7 |    0.05    0.36    0.14    0.17    0.19    0.32
 text*          8 |    0.21    0.08    0.09    0.14    0.15    0.10    0.13
 vocabulary     9 |    0.10    0.03    0.16    0.16    0.11    0.06    0.05    0.16
 word*         10 |    0.18    0.07    0.15    0.16    0.22    0.06    0.09    0.35    0.24


The standardised matrix is then submitted to Multidimensional Scaling with the following result:

Interpretation of MDS solutions may be assisted by reference to 
 Hierarchical Clustering.
 Smallest space analysis, on the other hand, is generally claimed to 
 produce more easily interpreted geometric solutions in fewer dimensions
 than metric procedures like Factor Analysis, as well as being more versatile
 in detecting ordered structures in the data.
 
The following are the results of applying 
 Correspondence Analysis to the same example:
 

 
 For further discussion of the procedures used here, see the references.