Martin has pointed out that the natural binning of the raw data and the different flipping operation of Gonzalez et al. could be partly responsible for the marked differences between their and our results. In particular, the double-peak structure might be reduced if our raw data are artificially binned and the same flipping rule (most occupied cell at right hand side) is used.
When applied to the experimental microbead data, the results are considerably closer to the single-peaked, triangular distributions of Gonzalez:
_cg_5E-2.png)
very nice, but I find the Gonzales operation (rotating, flipping, averaging etc) and the results little illuminating. What exactly can we learn from such kind of data manipulation? (I admit I haven't read the Gonzales nature paper)
ReplyDelete