---
title: "Data Formats"
author: "Hansjörg Neth, SPDS, uni.kn"
date: "2021 03 31"
output: 
  rmarkdown::html_vignette: 
    fig_caption: yes
vignette: >
  %\VignetteIndexEntry{Data Formats}
  %\VignetteEngine{knitr::rmarkdown}
  %\VignetteEncoding{UTF-8}
---

```{r setup, include = FALSE}
knitr::opts_chunk$set(
  collapse = TRUE,
  comment = "#>"
)

# URLs:
url_riskyr_org <- "https://riskyr.org/"
```

<!-- Motto: --> 

> The quest for certainty is the biggest obstacle to becoming risk savvy. 
> (Gerd Gigerenzer)^[Gigerenzer, G. (2014). _Risk savvy: How to make good decisions_. New York, NY: Penguin. (p. 21).]

<!-- Introduction: Uncertainty: Risks as probabilities vs. frequencies --> 

A major challenge in mastering risk literacy is coping with inevitable uncertainty. Fortunately, uncertainty in the form of _risk_ can be expressed in terms of probabilities and thus be measured and calculated or "reckoned" with (Gigerenzer, 2002). Nevertheless, probabilistic information is often difficult to understand, even for experts in risk management and statistics. 
A smart and effective way to communicate probabilities is by expressing them in terms of frequencies. 

## Two representational formats

The problems addressed by **riskyr** and the scientific discussion surrounding them can be framed in terms of two representational formats: Basically, risk-related information can be expressed in terms of _frequencies_ or in terms of _probabilities_ (see the [user guide](A_user_guide.html) for background information.)

**riskyr** reflects this basic division by distinguishing between the same two data types and hence provides objects that contain frequencies (specifically, a list called `freq`) and objects that contain probabilities (a list called `prob`). 
But before we explain their contents, it is important to realize that any such separation is an abstract and artificial one. It may make sense to distinguish frequencies from probabilities for conceptual and educational reasons, but both in theory and in reality both representations are intimately intertwined.^[For instance, we can distinguish between various types of probabilities (e.g., _joint_, _marginal_, and _conditional_ probabilities) and _natural frequencies_ provide a relational concept for expressing _probabilities_. See [Neth et al., 2021](https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.567817) for details.]  

In the following, we first consider frequencies and probabilities by themselves, before showing how both are related. As a sneak preview, the following prism plot shows both frequencies (as nodes) and probabilities (as edges connecting the nodes) from two perspectives: 

```{r prism-plot-1, message = FALSE, fig.width = 6, fig.height = 5, fig.show = 'asis', fig.cap = "A prism plot showing frequencies as nodes and probabilities as edges linking nodes."}
library("riskyr") # load the "riskyr" package

plot_prism(prev = .01, sens = .80, spec = NA, fart = .096,  # 3 essential probabilities
           N = 1000,       # 1 frequency
           area = "no",    # same size for all boxes
           p_lbl = "abb",  # show abbreviated names of probabilities on edges
           title_lbl = "Example")
```

## Frequencies

For our purposes, frequencies simply are numbers that can be counted --- either 0 or positive integers.^[It seems plausible that the notion of a _frequency_ is simpler than the notion of _probability_. Nevertheless, confusion is possible and typically causes serious scientific disputes. See Gigerenzer & Hoffrage, 1999, and Hoffrage et al., 2002, for different types of frequencies and the notion of _natural frequencies_.]

### Definitions

The following 11\ frequencies are distinguished by **riskyr** and contained in `freq`:

|Nr.| Variable | Definition |
|--:|:----     |:------------------------------------------------------|
|  1.  | `N`          | The number of cases (or individuals) in the population. |
|  2.  | `cond_true`  | The number of cases for which the condition is present (`TRUE`).  |
|  3.  | `cond_false` | The number of cases for which the condition is absent (`FALSE`).  |
|  4.  | `dec_pos`    | The number of cases for which the decision is positive (`TRUE`).  |
|  5.  | `dec_neg`    | The number of cases for which the decision is negative (`FALSE`). |
|  6.  | `dec_cor`    | The number of cases for which the decision is correct (correspondence between decision and condition). |
|  7.  | `dec_err`    | The number of cases for which the decision is erroneous (lack of correspondence between decision and condition). |
|  8.  | `hi` | The number of hits or true positives: condition present (`TRUE`) & decision positive (`TRUE`). |
|  9.  | `mi` | The number of misses or false negatives: condition present (`TRUE`) & decision negative (`FALSE`). |
|  10. | `fa` | The number of false alarms or false positives: condition absent (`FALSE`) & decision positive (`TRUE`). |
|  11. | `cr` | The number of correct rejections or true negatives: condition absent (`FALSE`) & decision negative (`FALSE`). |


### Perspectives: Basic vs. combined frequencies

The frequencies contained in `freq` can be viewed (or parsed) from two perspectives:

1. **Top-down: ** From the entire population to different parts or subgroups:<br> 
Whereas `N` specifies the population size, the other 10\ frequencies denote the number of individuals or cases in some subset. For instance, the frequency `dec_pos` denotes individuals for which the decision or diagnosis is positive. As this frequency is contained within the population, its numeric value must range from\ 0 to\ `N`.

2. **Bottom-up: ** From the 4\ essential subgroups to various combinations of them:<br> 
As the 4\ frequencies `hi`, `mi`, `fa`, and `cr` are not further split into subgroups, we can think of them as atomic elements or four _essential_ frequencies. All other frequencies in `freq` are sums of various combinations of these four essential frequencies. This implies that the entire network of frequencies and probabilities (shown in the network diagram above) can be reconstructed from these four essential frequencies.

### Relationships among frequencies

The following relationships hold among the 11\ frequencies:

1. The population size\ `N` can be split into several subgroups by classifying individuals by 4\ different criteria:

    a. by condition\ (`cd`); 
    b. by decision\ (`dc`); 
    c. by accuracy\ (`ac`) (i.e., the correspondence of decisions to conditions); 
    d. by the combination of condition and decision (i.e., a joint category). 

Depending on the criterion used, the following relationships hold:

$$ 
\begin{aligned}
\texttt{N} &= \texttt{cond_true} + \texttt{cond_false} & \textrm{(a)}\\
           &= \texttt{dec_pos} + \texttt{dec_neg}      & \textrm{(b)}\\
           &= \texttt{dec_cor} + \texttt{dec_err}      & \textrm{(c)}\\
           &= \texttt{hi} + \texttt{mi} + \texttt{fa} + \texttt{cr} & \textrm{(d)}\\
\end{aligned}
$$ 

Similarly, each of the subsets resulting from using the splits by _condition_\ (`cd`), by _decision_\ (`dc`), or by _accuracy_\ (`ac`), can also be expressed as a sum of two of the four essential frequencies. This results in three different ways of grouping the four essential frequencies:

(a) by condition\ (`cd`) (corresponding to the two columns of the [confusion matrix](C_confusion_matrix.html)): 

$$ 
\begin{aligned}
\texttt{N} \ &= \ \texttt{cond_true} & +\ \ \ \ \ &\texttt{cond_false}   & \textrm{(a)} \\
           \ &= \ (\texttt{hi} + \texttt{mi}) & +\ \ \ \ \ &(\texttt{fa} + \texttt{cr}) \\
\end{aligned}
$$

(b) by decision\ (`dc`) (corresponding to the two rows of the [confusion matrix](C_confusion_matrix.html)): 

$$ 
\begin{aligned}
\texttt{N} \ &= \ \texttt{dec_pos} & +\ \ \ \ \ &\texttt{dec_neg}   & \ \ \ \ \ \textrm{(b)}  \\
           \ &= \ (\texttt{hi} + \texttt{fa}) & +\ \ \ \ \ &(\texttt{mi} + \texttt{cr})   \\
\end{aligned}
$$ 

(c) by accuracy\ (`ac`) (or the correspondence of decisions to conditions, corresponding to the two diagonals of the [confusion matrix](C_confusion_matrix.html)): 

$$ 
\begin{aligned}
\texttt{N} \ &= \ \texttt{dec_cor} & +\ \ \ \ \ &\texttt{dec_err}   & \ \ \ \ \textrm{(c)}  \\
           \ &= \ (\texttt{hi} + \texttt{cr}) & +\ \ \ \ \ &(\texttt{mi} + \texttt{fa}) \\
\end{aligned}
$$

It may be tempting to refer to instances of `dec_cor` and `dec_err` as "true decisions" and "false decisions". However, these terms invite conceptual confusion, as "true decisions" actually include `cond_false` cases\ (TN or `cr` cases) and "false decisions" actually include `cond_true` cases (FN or `mi` cases). 

## Probabilities

The notions of _probability_ is as elusive as ubiquitous (see Hájek, 2012, for a solid exposition of its different concepts and interpretations). 
For our present purposes, _probabilities_ are simply numbers between\ 0 and\ 1. 
These numbers are defined to reflect particular quantities and can be expressed as percentages, as functions of and ratios between other numbers (frequencies or probabilities).

### Definitions

**riskyr** distinguishes between 13\ probabilities (see `prob` for current values):

|Nr.| Variable | Name | Definition |
|--: |:---   |:------------  |:----------------------------------------------|
|  1. | `prev` | prevalence  | The probability of the _condition_ being `TRUE`. |
|  2. | `sens` | sensitivity | The conditional probability of a _positive decision_ provided that the _condition_ is `TRUE`.  |
|  3. | `mirt` | miss rate   | The conditional probability of a _negative decision_ provided that the _condition_ is `TRUE`.  |
|  4. | `spec` | specificity | The conditional probability of a _negative decision_ provided that the _condition_ is `FALSE`. |
|  5. | `fart` | false alarm rate | The conditional probability of a _positive decision_ provided that the _condition_ is `FALSE`.  |
|  6. | `ppod` | proportion of positive decisions | The proportion (baseline probability or rate) of the _decision_ being _positive_ (but _not_ necessarily `TRUE`). |
|  7. | `PPV` | positive predictive value | The conditional probability of the _condition_ being `TRUE` provided that the _decision_ is _positive_. |
|  8. | `FDR` | false detection rate | The conditional probability of the _condition_ being `FALSE` provided that the _decision_ is _positive_. |
|  9. | `NPV` | negative predictive value | The conditional probability of the _condition_ being `FALSE` provided that the _decision_ is _negative_. |
| 10. | `FOR` | false omission rate | The conditional probability of the _condition_ being `TRUE` provided that the _decision_ is _negative_. | 
| 11. | `acc` | accuracy | The probability of a _correct decision_ (i.e., correspondence of decisions to conditions). | 
| 12. | `p_acc_hi` | -- | The conditional probability of the _condition_ being `TRUE` provided that a decision or prediction is _accurate_. | 
| 13. | `p_err_fa` | -- | The conditional probability of the _condition_ being `FALSE` provided that a decision or prediction is _inaccurate_ or _erroneous_. | 

Note that the prism diagram (`plot_prism`) shows a total of 18\ probabilities: 
3\ perspectives (`by = "cd"`, `by = "dc"`, and `by = "ac"`) and 6\ edges denoting the (marginal and conditional) probabilities for each perspective. However, we currently do not explicitly identify all possible probabilities.^[For instance, some probabilities are the complements of others and do not have explicit names. Also, _joint_ probabilities (e.g., the probabilities of `hi`, `mi`, `fa`, and `cr`) are not included in `prob`, but generated when needed (e.g., see `plot_fnet()`).] 


### Non-conditional vs. conditional probabilities

Note that a typical **riskyr** scenario contains several _marginal_ or _non-conditional_ probabilities:

- The prevalence\ `prev` (1.) only depends on features of the _condition_.
- The proportion of positive decisions\ `ppod` (or bias) (6.) only depends on features of the _decision_. 
- The accuracy `acc` (11.) depends on\ `prev` and\ `ppod`, but unconditionally dissects a population into two groups (`dec_cor` vs.\ `dec_err`). 

The other probabilities are _conditional_ probabilities based on three perspectives:

1. by _condition_: conditional probabilities (2. to\ 5.) depend on the _condition_'s\ `prev` and features of the _decision_.  
2. by _decision_: conditional probabilities (7. to\ 10.) depend on the _decision_'s\ `ppod` and features of the _condition_.  
3. by _accuracy_: conditional probabilities based on _accuracy_ `acc` are currently computed, but --\ in the absence of a commonly accepted term\ --- named `p_acc_hi` and `p_err_fa` (12. and 13.).

### Relationships among probabilities

The following relationships hold among the conditional probabilities:

- The sensitivity\ `sens` and miss rate\ `mirt` are complements:

$$
\texttt{sens} = 1 - \texttt{mirt}
$$
- The specificity\ `spec` and false alarm rate\ `fart` are complements:

$$
\texttt{spec} = 1 - \texttt{fart}
$$
- The positive predictive value\ `PPV` and false detection rate\ `FDR` are complements:

$$
\texttt{PPV} = 1 - \texttt{FDR}
$$
- The negative predictive value\ `NPV` and false omission rate\ `FOR` are complements:

$$
\texttt{NPV} = 1 - \texttt{FOR}
$$

It is possible to adapt Bayes' formula to define\ `PPV` and\ `NPV` in terms of `prev`, `sens`, and `spec`:

$$
\texttt{PPV} = \frac{\texttt{prev} \cdot \texttt{sens}}{\texttt{prev} \cdot \texttt{sens} + (1 - \texttt{prev}) \cdot (1 - \texttt{sens})}\\
 \\
 \\
\texttt{NPV} = \frac{(1 - \texttt{prev}) \cdot \texttt{spec}}{\texttt{prev} \cdot (1 - \texttt{sens}) + (1 - \texttt{prev}) \cdot \texttt{spec}}
$$

Although this is how the functions `comp_PPV` and `comp_NPV` compute the desired conditional probability, it is difficult to remember and think in these terms. Instead, we recommend thinking about and defining all conditional probabilities in terms of frequencies and relations between frequencies (see [Neth et al., 2021](https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.567817) for details). 


## Probabilities as ratios between frequencies

The easiest way to think about, define, and compute the probabilities (contained in\ `prob`) is in terms of frequencies (contained in\ `freq`): 


| Nr.| Variable | Name          | Definition                          | as Frequencies |
|--: |:---      |:------------  |:----------------------------------- |:------------ |
|  1. | `prev` | prevalence  | The probability of the _condition_ being `TRUE`. | `prev` = `cond_true`/`N` | 
|  2. | `sens` | sensitivity | The conditional probability of a _positive decision_ provided that the _condition_ is `TRUE`. | `sens` = `hi`/`cond_true` |
|  3. | `mirt` | miss rate | The conditional probability of a _negative decision_ provided that the _condition_ is `TRUE`.  | `mirt` = `mi`/`cond_true` |
|  4. | `spec` | specificity | The conditional probability of a _negative decision_ provided that the _condition_ is `FALSE`. | `spec` = `cr`/`cond_false` |
|  5. | `fart` | false alarm rate | The conditional probability of a _positive decision_ provided that the _condition_ is `FALSE`. | `fart` = `fa`/`cond_false` |
|  6. | `ppod` | proportion of positive decisions | The proportion (baseline probability or rate) of the _decision_ being _positive_ (but _not_ necessarily `TRUE`). | `ppod` = `dec_pos`/`N` |
|  7. | `PPV` | positive predictive value | The conditional probability of the _condition_ being `TRUE` provided that the _decision_ is _positive_. | `PPV` = `hi`/`dec_pos` |
|  8. | `FDR` | false detection rate | The conditional probability of the _condition_ being `FALSE` provided that the _decision_ is _positive_. | `FDR` = `fa`/`dec_pos` |
|  9. | `NPV` | negative predictive value | The conditional probability of the _condition_ being `FALSE` provided that the _decision_ is _negative_. | `NPV` = `cr`/`dec_neg` |
| 10. | `FOR` | false omission rate | The conditional probability of the _condition_ being `TRUE` provided that the _decision_ is _negative_. | `FOR` = `mi`/`dec_neg` |
| 11. | `acc` | accuracy | The probability of a _correct decision_ (i.e., correspondence of decisions to conditions). | `acc` = `dec_cor`/`N` |
| 12. | `p_acc_hi` | -- | The conditional probability of the _condition_ being `TRUE` provided that a decision or prediction is _accurate_. | `p_acc_hi` = `hi`/`dec_cor` | 
| 13. | `p_err_fa` | -- | The conditional probability of the _condition_ being `FALSE` provided that a decision or prediction is _inaccurate_ or _erroneous_. | `p_err_fa` = `fa`/`dec_err` | 

Note that the ratios between frequencies are straightforward consequences of the probabilities' definitions:

1. The unconditional probabilities (1., 6. and\ 11.) are proportions of the entire population:

   - `prev` = `cond_true`/`N`
   - `ppod` = `dec_pos`/`N`
   - `acc` = `dec_cor`/`N`

2. The conditional probabilities (2.--5., 7.--10., and 11.--12.) can be computed as a proportion of the reference group on which they are conditional. More specifically, if we schematically read each definition as "The conditional probability of $X$ provided that $Y$", then the ratio of the corresponding frequencies is `X & Y`/`Y`. More explicitly, 

- the ratio's numerator is the frequency of the joint occurrence (i.e., both `X & Y`) being the case; 
- the ratio's denominator is the frequency of the condition (`Y`) being the case.

When computing probabilities from rounded frequencies, their numeric values may deviate from the true underlying probabilities, particularly for small population sizes `N`.  (Use the `scale` argument of many **riskyr** plotting functions to control whether probabilities are based on frequencies.) 

## Practice

### An example

The following prism (or network) diagram is based on the following inputs:

- a condition's prevalence of\ 50\% (`prev = .50`);
- a decision's sensitivity of\ 80\% (`sens = .80`);
- a decision's specificity of\ 60\% (`spec = .60`);
- a population size of 10\ individuals (`N = 10`);

and illustrates the relationship between frequencies and probabilities: 

```{r prism-plot-2, fig.width = 6, fig.height = 5, fig.show = 'asis', fig.cap = "A prism plot showing how probabilities can be computed as ratios between frequencies."}
plot_prism(prev = .50, sens = .80, spec = .60,  # 3 essential probabilities
           N = 10,         # population frequency
           scale = "f",    # scale by frequency, rather than probability ("p") 
           area = "sq",    # boxes as squares, with sizes scaled by current scale  
           p_lbl = "num",  # show numeric probability values on edges
           title_lbl = "Probabilities as ratios between frequencies")
```

### Your tasks

1. Verify that the probabilities (shown as numeric values on the edges) match the ratios of the corresponding frequencies (shown in the boxes). What are the names of these probabilities?

2. What is the frequency of `dec_cor` and `dec_err` cases? Where do these cases appear in the diagram?

3. The parameter values in the example do not require any rounding of frequencies. Change them (e.g., to `N = 5`) and explore what happens when alternating between `scale = "f"` and `scale = "p"`.


## References

- Gigerenzer, G. (2002). 
_Reckoning with risk: Learning to live with uncertainty_. 
London, UK: Penguin. 

- Gigerenzer, G. (2014). 
_Risk savvy: How to make good decisions_. 
New York, NY: Penguin. 

- Gigerenzer, G., & Hoffrage, U. (1999). 
Overcoming difficulties in Bayesian reasoning: A reply to Lewis and Keren (1999) and Mellers and McGraw (1999). 
_Psychological Review_, _106_, 425--430. 

- Hájek, A (2012) [Interpretations of Probability](https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/probability-interpret/). 
In Edward N. Zalta (Ed.), _The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy_. 
URL: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/probability-interpret/ [2012 Archive](https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2012/entries/probability-interpret/) 

- Hoffrage, U., Gigerenzer, G., Krauss, S., & Martignon, L. (2002). 
Representation facilitates reasoning: What natural frequencies are and what they are not. 
_Cognition_, _84_, 343--352. 

- Neth, H., Gradwohl, N., Streeb, D., Keim, D.A., & Gaissmaier, W. (2021). 
Perspectives on the 2x2 matrix: Solving semantically distinct problems based on a shared structure of binary contingencies. _Frontiers in Psychology: Cognition_, _11_, 567817. 
doi: [10.3389/fpsyg.2020.567817](https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.567817) 
([Available online](https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.567817))  

- Trevethan, R. (2017). 
Sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values: Foundations, pliabilities, and pitfalls in research and practice. 
_Frontiers in Public Health_, _5_, 307. 
([Available online](https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2017.00307)) 


### Resources

The following resources and versions are currently available:

Type:                    | Version:           | URL:                           |        
:------------------------|:-------------------|:-------------------------------|
A. **riskyr** (R package): | [Release version](https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=riskyr)  | <https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=riskyr> |
    &nbsp;               | [Development version](https://github.com/hneth/riskyr/)         | <https://github.com/hneth/riskyr/> | 
B. **riskyrApp** (R Shiny code): | [Online version](`r url_riskyr_org`)                    | [https://riskyr.org/](`r url_riskyr_org`) | 
    &nbsp;               | [Development version](https://github.com/hneth/riskyrApp/)      | <https://github.com/hneth/riskyrApp/> | 
C. Online documentation: | [Release version](https://hneth.github.io/riskyr/)              | <https://hneth.github.io/riskyr/> | 
    &nbsp;               | [Development version](https://hneth.github.io/riskyr/dev/)      | <https://hneth.github.io/riskyr/dev/> | 


## Contact

<!-- uni.kn logo and link to SPDS: -->  
<a href="https://spds.uni-konstanz.de/">
<img src = "../inst/pix/uniKn_logo.png" alt = "spds.uni.kn" style = "width: 280px; float: right; border:15;"/> 
</a>

We appreciate your feedback, comments, or questions. 

- Please report any **riskyr**-related issues at <https://github.com/hneth/riskyr/issues/>.  

- Contact us at <contact.riskyr@gmail.com> with any comments, questions, or suggestions.  


## All riskyr vignettes

<!-- riskyr logo: -->
<a href="https://github.com/hneth/riskyr/">
<img src = "../inst/pix/riskyr_cube.png" alt = "riskyr" style = "width: 125px; float: right; border:20;"/>
</a>

<!-- Index of vignettes: -->

| Nr.  | Vignette | Content    |        
| ---: |:---------|:-----------|
| A. | [User guide](A_user_guide.html) | Motivation and general instructions | 
| B. | [Data formats](B_data_formats.html) | Data formats: Frequencies and probabilities | 
| C. | [Confusion matrix](C_confusion_matrix.html) | Confusion matrix and accuracy metrics |
| D. | [Functional perspectives](D_functional_perspectives.html) | Adopting functional perspectives |
| E. | [Quick start primer](E_riskyr_primer.html) | Quick start primer |

<!-- eof. -->
