search for: nonunique

...ta <- numeric() mydata$id <- 0:8 mydata$unique <- c(1:5, 1:4) mydata$result <- c(1:3, 1:3, 1:3) > mydata $id [1] 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 $unique [1] 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 $result [1] 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 What I want to to be able to get some form of data output that might look like this: > nonunique(mydata$unique) mydata$unique 1 $id 0, 5 2 $id 1, 6 3 $id 2, 7 4 $id 3, 8 So that I could report to my data entry team any non-unique values of unique and tell them the row numbers so they can check if the 'unique' value is keyed wrongly, or the entry had been made twice. Hoping there...

...ave estimated a set of coefficients using the method="br" algorithm with the rq command at various quantiles along the entire distribution. My data set contains approximately 2,500 observations and I have 7 predictor variables. I receive the following warning message: Solution may be nonunique in: rq.fit.br(x, y, tau = tau, ...) There are 13 warnings of this type after I run a single model. My results are similiar to the results I received in other stat programs using quantile reg procedures. I am unclear what these warning messages imply and if there are problems with model fit/con...

To extwnd on Martin 's explanation : In factor(), levels are the unique input values and labels the unique output values. So the function levels() actually displays the labels. Cheers Joris On 15 Jun 2017 17:15, "Martin Maechler" <maechler at stat.math.ethz.ch> wrote: >>>>> Paul Johnson <pauljohn32 at gmail.com> >>>>> on Wed, 14 Jun

...s are the unique input values and labels the unique output >> values. So the function levels() actually displays the labels. >> > Dear Joris > I think we agree. Currently, factor insists both levels and labels be unique. > I wish that it would not accept nonunique labels. I also understand it > is impractical to change this now in base R. > I don't think I succeeded in explaining why this would be nicer. > Here's another example. Fairly often, we see input data like > x <- c("Male", "Man", "ma...

...), the "row.names<-" function gives an error if you try to assign non-unique row.names. This is as desired (and R should do the same). (== BUG REPORT for R ) 3) However, I can still (both in S-plus 3.4 & 5.0r2) do attr(dat, "row.names") <- <nonunique character> and get a resulting data.frame dat with non-unique row.names. PROPOSITION 2: I think I want to make sure that a(the same?) error message as in "2)" is generated in this case. (this is relatively easily accomplished via R's SetAttrib() in src/main/attr...

...ula = sand ~ method, tau = 0.5, data = x) Coefficients: Value Std. Error t value Pr(>|t|) (Intercept) 44.91579 2.46341 18.23318 0.00000 methodmukey-HRU 9.57601 9.29348 1.03040 0.30380 Warning message: In rq.fit.br(x, y, tau = tau, ...) : Solution may be nonunique I have noticed that the error message goes away when specifying method='fn' to rq(). An example is below. Could this have something to do with replication in the data? # example: library(quantreg) # load data x <- read.csv(url('http://169.237.35.250/~dylan/temp/test.csv'))...

...s: 1: In summary.rq(quantreg.emaff) : 3 non-positive fis <- I don't understand this message - is this a cause for concern? 2: In summary.rq(quantreg.emaff) : 3 non-positive fis 3: In summary.rq(quantreg.emaff) : 5 non-positive fis 4: In rq.fit.br(x, y, tau = tau, ...) : Solution may be nonunique 5: In summary.rq(quantreg.emaff) : 6 non-positive fis 6: In summary.rq(quantreg.emaff) : 5 non-positive fis 7: In summary.rq(quantreg.emaff) : 5 non-positive fis 8: In summary.rq(quantreg.emaff) : 7 non-positive fis 9: In summary.rq(quantreg.emaff) : 10 non-positive fis 10: In summary.rq(quan...

...abels the unique output >>>> values. So the function levels() actually displays the labels. >>>> > >>> Dear Joris > >>> I think we agree. Currently, factor insists both levels and labels be unique. > >>> I wish that it would not accept nonunique labels. I also understand it >>> is impractical to change this now in base R. > >>> I don't think I succeeded in explaining why this would be nicer. >>> Here's another example. Fairly often, we see input data like > >>> x <- c("Male",...

...s explanation : > > In factor(), levels are the unique input values and labels the unique output > values. So the function levels() actually displays the labels. > Dear Joris I think we agree. Currently, factor insists both levels and labels be unique. I wish that it would not accept nonunique labels. I also understand it is impractical to change this now in base R. I don't think I succeeded in explaining why this would be nicer. Here's another example. Fairly often, we see input data like x <- c("Male", "Man", "male", "Man", "Fem...

...ge of SIP/7408-02e3 and SIP/192.168.1.252-da4c Urgent handler -- H.323 call 'ip$localhost/24286' cleared, reason 1 (Cleared by local user) Urgent handler -- Executing Hangup("SIP/7408-02e3", "") in new stack -- Starting Query -- Sucessfully Setup Unique or Nonunique loggin -- Checked DB Connection -- Setup QueryUrgent handler Segmentation fault (core dumped) I'm having some trouble with cdr_odbc I have installed from 1.0.6 stable and it keeps seg faulting when trying to execute the cdr record. Does anyone have any idea or how do I go about debugging...

....00000 0.66909 3.01845 dato$CobSDgrupo 0.32500 -0.56172 1.77540 dato$Areadecultivosgrupo -0.15000 -0.43830 0.12112 Warning message: In rq.fit.br(x, y, tau = tau, ci = TRUE, ...) : Solution may be nonunique My questions are these: 1) Why do I get different outputs? Why I don't get the p values for each coefficient in the second output? Is there a problem with tables? 2) Are the two outputs showing the same information? Can I interpret that if zero is included in the interval of the second output...

...ld do the same). MM> (== BUG REPORT for R ) this is easily fixed in data.frame.R if one doesn't want to do the fix for "3)" as well. MM> 3) However, I can still (both in S-plus 3.4 & 5.0r2) MM> do MM> attr(dat, "row.names") <- <nonunique character> MM> and get a resulting data.frame dat with non-unique row.names. MM> PROPOSITION 2: I think I want to make sure that a(the same?) MM> error message as in "2)" is generated in this case. MM> (this is relatively easily accomplished via...

...ut values and labels the unique output >>> values. So the function levels() actually displays the labels. >>> >> Dear Joris >> I think we agree. Currently, factor insists both levels and labels be unique. >> I wish that it would not accept nonunique labels. I also understand it >> is impractical to change this now in base R. >> I don't think I succeeded in explaining why this would be nicer. >> Here's another example. Fairly often, we see input data like >> x <- c("Male", "Man...

...>>>> values. So the function levels() actually displays the labels. >>>>> >> >>>> Dear Joris >> >>>> I think we agree. Currently, factor insists both levels and labels be unique. >> >>>> I wish that it would not accept nonunique labels. I also understand it >>>> is impractical to change this now in base R. >> >>>> I don't think I succeeded in explaining why this would be nicer. >>>> Here's another example. Fairly often, we see input data like >> >>>> x &lt...

I was working on archiving an old virtual server today and was reminded of how much space is wasted by some of the default installations on CentOS. I think this was a 5.x box. Anyway, in /usr/lib/64 (and probably /usr/lib on non-64 systems), there were a lot of directories which have no bearing on a basic server. I saw firefox, openoffice and many, many other directories -- replete with enough

Hello, I have the following very simple problem: Say I have two vectors, a<-c(1,7,4,5,9,11) b<-c(7,4,9) I would like to create a vector containing the elements in a which are not in b. Obviously, this is possible by writing a[a!=b[1] & a!=b[2] & a!=b[3]] But I would like a solution which is applicable to the situation where the number of elements in b is unknown. I have