## Not run:
# dend1 <- iris[,-5] %>% dist %>% hclust("com") %>% as.dendrogram
# dend2 <- iris[,-5] %>% dist %>% hclust("sin") %>% as.dendrogram
# dend12 <- dendlist(dend1, dend2)
# tanglegram(dend12)
#
# entanglement(dend12)
# entanglement(dend12, L = 0)
# entanglement(dend12, L = 0.25)
# entanglement(dend1,dend2, L = 0) # 1
# entanglement(dend1,dend2, L = 0.25) # 0.97
# entanglement(dend1,dend2, L = 1) # 0.93
# entanglement(dend1,dend2, L = 2) # 0.88
#
# # a somewhat better tanglegram
# tanglegram(sort(dend1),sort(dend2))
# # and alos a MUCH better entanglement
# entanglement(sort(dend1),sort(dend2), L=1.5) # 0.0811
# # but not that much, for L=0.25
# entanglement(sort(dend1),sort(dend2), L=.25) # 0.579
#
#
#
# ##################
# ##################
# ##################
# # massing up the order of leaves is dangerous:
# entanglement(dend1 , dend2, 1.5, "order") # 0.91
# order.dendrogram(dend2) <- seq_len(nleaves(dend2))
# # this 0.95 number is NO LONGER correct!!
# entanglement(dend1 , dend2, 1.5, "order") # 0.95
# # but if we use the "labels" method - we still get the correct number:
# entanglement(dend1 , dend2, 1.5, "labels") # 0.91
#
# # however, we can fix our dend2, as follows:
# dend2 <- match_order_by_labels(dend2, dend1)
# # Now that labels and order are matched - entanglement is back at working fine:
# entanglement(dend1 , dend2, 1.5, "order") # 0.91
#
#
#
# ## End(Not run)
Run the code above in your browser using DataLab