TL;DR
This paper reveals that the commonly held belief that Cramer's V reaches a maximum of 1 is incorrect and proposes a modified version of Cramer's V to address this issue.
Contribution
The authors identify a flaw in the traditional understanding of Cramer's V maximum value and introduce a modified coefficient to improve its accuracy.
Findings
The maximum of Cramer's V is not always 1.
A new modified Cramer's V is proposed.
The modified version provides a more accurate measure of association.
Abstract
The Cramer's V is popular as an association coefficient in goodness-of-fit tests for contingency tables and its maximum value is known to be , but it is not true. We propose a modified Cramer's V.
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsMathematics and Applications · Aerospace Engineering and Control Systems · History and Theory of Mathematics