similar to: Degrees of freedom in binomial glm

Displaying 5 results from an estimated 5 matches similar to: "Degrees of freedom in binomial glm"

2006 Oct 26
2
experiences with zpool errors and glm flipouts
Tonight I''ve been moving some of my personal data around on my desktop system and have hit some on-disk corruption. As you may know, I''m cursed, and so this had a high probability of ending badly. I have two SCSI disks and use live upgrade, and I have a partition, /aux0, where I tend to keep personal stuff. This is on an SB2500 running snv_46. The upshot is that I have a slice
2008 Jun 09
1
Cross-validation in R
Folks; I am having a problem with the cv.glm and would appreciate someone shedding some light here. It seems obvious but I cannot get it. I did read the manual, but I could not get more insight. This is a database containing 3363 records and I am trying a cross-validation to understand the process. When using the cv.glm, code below, I get mean of perr1 of 0.2336 and SD of 0.000139. When using a
2005 Aug 04
0
add1.lm and add1.glm not handling weights and offsets properly (PR#8049)
I am using R 2.1.1 under Mac OS 10.3.9. Two related problems (see notes 1. and 2. below) are illustrated by results of the following: y <- rnorm(10) x <- z <- 1:10 is.na(x[9]) <- TRUE lm0 <- lm(y ~ 1) lm1 <- lm(y ~ 1, weights = rep(1, 10)) add1(lm0, scope = ~ x) ## works ok add1(lm1, scope = ~ x) ## error lm2 <- lm(y ~ 1, offset = 1:10) add1(lm0, scope = ~ z) ##
2005 Aug 05
0
(PR#8049) add1.lm and add1.glm not handling weights and
David, Thanks. The reason add1.lm (and drop1.lm) do not support offsets is that lm did not when they were written, and the person who added offsets to lm did not change them. (I do wish they had not added an offset arg and just used the formula as in S's glm.) That is easy to add. For the other point, some care is needed if 'x' is supplied and the upper scope reduces the number
2007 Dec 09
8
zpool kernel panics.
Hi Folks, I''ve got a 3.9 Tb zpool, and it is casing kernel panics on my Solaris 10 280r (SPARC) server. The message I get on panic is this: panic[cpu1]/thread=2a100a95cc0: zfs: freeing free segment (offset=423713792 size=1024) This seems to come about when the zpool is being used or being scrubbed - about twice a day at the moment. After the reboot, the scrub seems to have