Behaviour of resampling methods under different weighting schemes, measures and variable resampling strengths

We compared general behaviour trends of resampling methods (bootstrap, bootstrap with Poisson distribution, jackknife, and jackknife with symmetric resampling) and different ways to summarize the results for resampling (absolute frequency, F, and frequency difference, GC¢) for real data sets under variable resampling strengths in three weighting schemes. We propose an equivalence between bootstrap and jackknife in order to make bootstrap variable across different resampling strengths. Specifically, for each method we evaluated the number of spurious groups (groups not present in the strict consensus of the unaltered data set), of real groups, and of inconsistencies in ranking of groups under variable resampling strengths. We found that GC¢ always generated more spurious groups and recovered more groups than F. Bootstrap methods generated more spurious groups than jackknife methods; and jackknife is the method that recovered more real groups. We consistently obtained a higher proportion of spurious groups for GC¢ than for F; and for bootstrap than for jackknife. Finally, we evaluated the ranking of groups under variable resampling strengths qualitatively in the trajectories of ‘‘support’’ against resampling strength, and quantitatively with Kendall coefficient values. We found fewer ranking inconsistencies for GC¢ than for F, and for bootstrap than for jackknife.Fil: Kopuchian, Cecilia. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Nordeste. Centro de Ecología Aplicada del Litoral. Universidad Nacional del Nordeste. Centro de Ecología Aplicada del Litoral; ArgentinaFil: Ramirez, Martin Javier. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Oficina de Coordinación Administrativa Parque Centenario. Museo Argentino de Ciencias Naturales "Bernardino Rivadavia"; Argentin