search for: binomal

Hi all, I am wondering whether there is a small bug in the binom.test function of the ctest library (I'm using R 1.6.0 on windows 2000, but Splus 2000 seems to have the same behaviour). Or perhaps I've misunderstood something. the command binom.test(11,100,p=0.1) and binom.test(9,100,p=0.1) give different p-values (see below). As 9 and 11 are equidistant from 10, the mean of the

Full_Name: Petr Savicky Version: 2.4.0 OS: Fedora Core release 2 Submission from: (NULL) (62.24.91.47) the error is > binom.test(0.56*10000,10000) Error in binom.test(0.56 * 10000, 10000) : 'x' must be nonnegative and integer while > binom.test(5600,10000) yields correct result. The same error occurrs for > binom.test(0.57*10000,10000)

Hello all, I am trying to understand the different results I am getting from the following 3 commands: chisq.test(c(62,50), p = c(0.512,1-0.512), correct = F) # p-value = 0.3788 binom.test(x=62,n=112, p= 0.512) # p-value = 0.3961 2*(1-pbinom(62,112, .512)) # p-value = 0.329 Well, the binom.test was supposed to be "exact" and give the same results as the pbinom, while the chisq.test

Hello everybody. Does anyone else find the last test in the following sequence odd? Can anyone else reproduce it or is it just me? > binom.test(100,200,0.13)$p.value [1] 2.357325e-36 > binom.test(100,200,0.013)$p.value [1] 6.146546e-131 > binom.test(100,200,0.0013)$p.value [1] 1.973702e-230 > binom.test(100,200,0.00013)$p.value [1] 0.9743334 (R 1.5.1, Linux RedHat 7.1) --

R. 1.1.0 The example below is self explanatory. ## 1 ## # works fine > binom.test((50*.64),50,.5,alt='g') ... Exact binomial test ... ## 2 ## # WHAT ! ? > binom.test((50*.65),50,.5,alt='g') Error in binom.test((50 * 0.65), 50, 0.5, alt = "g") : x must be an

R-experts: A quick question, please. >From a lab exp, I got 12 positives out of 50. To get 90% CI for this , I think binom.test might be the one to be used. Is there a better way or function to calculate this? > binom.test(x=12, n=50, p=12/50, conf.level = 0.90) Exact binomial test data: 12 and 50 number of successes = 12, number of trials = 50, p-value = 1 alternative

No, since I'd like to test null: p <= p0 alternative: p > p0. and my understanding is that binom.test tests null: p = p0 (can only be a "simple" null hypothesis according to help(binom.test)) alternative: p > p0 (or p < p0 or p != p0). Thanks, Mirko. > -----Urspr?ngliche Nachricht----- > Von: Douglas Bates [mailto:bates at stat.wisc.edu] >

Hi Folks, The recent correspondence about "strange fisher.test result", and especially Peter Dalgaard's reply on Tue 03 April 2007 (which I want to investigate further) led me to take a close look at the code for binom.test(). I now have a query! The code for the two-sided case computes the p-value as follows: if (p == 0) (x == 0) else if (p == 1) (x == n)

Hi, I noticed this problem on my home desktop running FC4 and again on my laptop running FC5. Both have previously compiled and passed make check-all on 2.3.1 svn revisions from 10 days ago or so. On both these machines, make check-all is consistently failing (4 out of 4 attempts on the FC 4 desktop and 3 out of 3 on the FC 5 laptop) in the p-r-random-tests tests. This is with both default

R 0630 for windows > library(ctest) > binom.test(7,10,p=0.3, alternative="two.sided") returns a p-value of =< 2.2e-016 and a warning In Splus 3.4 > binom.test(7,10,p=0.3, alternative="two.sided") returns a p-value of 0.0106 I think it is the max(v[v<=(1+eps)*PVAL]) causing the problem... max() of an empty vector....... Mai Z

running R 1.4.1 on MAC and 1.2.2 on Linux When I use run binom.test with small N the results are a little perplexing to me >binom.test(9,20,p=0.5) gives the below plus other stuff 95 percent confidence interval: 0.2305779 0.6847219 Now: >pbiom(9,20,0.6847219) [1] 0.02499998 # i.e., lower 2.5% of distribution >pbinom(9,20,0.2305779) [1] 0.9923132 >pbinom(8,20,0.2305779)

I believe the binom.test procedure is producing one tailed p values rather than the two tailed value implied by the alternative hypothesis language. A textbook and SAS both show 2*9.94e-07 = 1.988e-06 as the two tailed value. As does the R summation syntax from R below. It looks to me like the alternative hypothesis language should be revised to something like " ... greater than or equal

With this line: > binom.test(x=12, n=50, p=12/50, conf.level = 0.90) I get this output: > Exact binomial test > > data: 12 and 50 > number of successes = 12, number of trials = 50, p-value = 1 > alternative hypothesis: true probability of success is not equal to 0.24 > 90 percent confidence interval: > 0.1447182 0.3596557 > sample estimates: > probability

Hi, I was hoping to get some advice regarding the testing of interactions, when one factor is modelled as a random effect... I have a model with binomial error structure where the response variable is the proportion of time spent at the main sett (animals were tracked for 28 consecutive days in each season, and were recorded either at the main sett or an outlier sett, so the response variable is

Hi there, as part of a 2 x 2 contingency table analysis I would like to estimate conditional probabilities (success rates) in a Bernoulli experiment. In particular I want to test a null hypothesis p <= p0 versus the alternative hypothesis p > p0. As far as I understand the subject, there are UMPU tests for these types of hypotheses. Now I know about R's "binom.test" but the

Hi, With the following Sweave minimal file: ---<--------------------cut here---------------start------------------->--- \documentclass{article} \usepackage{Sweave} \begin{document} <<binom-sim>>= thetas <- seq(0, 1, by=0.001) prior <- rep(1, length(thetas)) / length(thetas) lik <- dbinom(1, 1, thetas) lik.p <- prior * lik post <- lik.p / sum(lik.p)

I can't get confint.glm to work from within a function. Consider the following (using R 1.9.1, Windows 2000): # FIRST: SOMETHING THAT WORKS FROM A COMMAND PROMPT DF <- data.frame(y=.1, N=100) (fit <- glm(y~1, family=binomial, data=DF, weights=DF[,"N"])) Call: glm(formula = y ~ 1, family = binomial, data = DF, weights = DF[, "N"]) Coefficients:

Dear Listers, I am trying to use "rbinom" in my C code, but i always get zeros as output no matter the probability. Am not sure what I am doing wrong because the function has worked before. Attached in an example. Noticed that "rbinom" expects 'n' to be REAL. Regards, Vumani R 2.3.1 (2006-06-01) Windows XP Gcc /* Called this file binom.c and then ran rcmd shlib on it

When I perform a two-tailed sign test with the following simple syntax, binom.test(59,100) R returns a P-value (0.088) but nothing else. As I want the result for a one-tailed test I take P/2 = 0.044). However, the journal to which I've submitted my results requests the test statistics, not just the P-values. How can I make R return the test statistics? Best regards, Johan Stenberg, Umea

Dr. Flom, I was searching the web for any examples of one-inflated negative binomial regression, and ran across your post. Fittingly, I am working on the analysis of data from the NIDA Cooperative Agreement where I had the pleasure of working with Sherry Deren and other folks at NDRI. NBR does a poor job of modeling number of sex partners. (I am using Stata.) Did you have any luck modeling a