search for: strt

...t <- data.frame(x1,x2,x3,x4,x5,x6,x7,x8,y1) #the real data won't have these names... cn <- names(dat) trg <- "y1" xvars <- cn[cn!=trg] frm1<-as.formula(paste(trg,"~1")) frm2<-as.formula(paste(trg,"~ 1 + ",paste(xvars,collapse = "+"))) strt=lm(y1~1,dat) # boot.stepAIC Works fine #strt=do.call("lm",list(frm1,data=dat)) ## boot.stepAIC FAILS ## #strt=lm(frm1,dat) ## boot.stepAIC FAILS ## limit<-5 stp=stepAIC(strt,direction='forward',steps=limit, scope=list(lower=frm1,upper=frm2)) bst <- boot.ste...

...Message----- From: Bert Gunter [mailto:bgunter.4567 at gmail.com] Sent: 22 August 2017 20:38 To: Stephen O'hagan <SOhagan at manchester.ac.uk> Cc: r-help at r-project.org Subject: Re: [R] boot.stepAIC fails with computed formula OK, here's the problem. Continuing with your example: strt1 <- lm(y1 ~1, dat) strt2 <- lm(frm1,dat) > strt1 Call: lm(formula = y1 ~ 1, data = dat) Coefficients: (Intercept) 41.73 > strt2 Call: lm(formula = frm1, data = dat) Coefficients: (Intercept) 41.73 Note that the formula objects of the lm object are different: strt2 d...

It seems that if you build the formula as a character string, and postpone the "as.formula" into the lm call, it works. instead of frm1 <- as.formula(paste(trg,"~1")) use frm1a <- paste(trg,"~1") and then strt <- lm(as.formula(frm1a),dat) regards, Heinz Stephen O'hagan wrote/hat geschrieben on/am 23.08.2017 12:07: > Until I get a fix that works, a work-around would be to rename the 'y1' column, used a fixed formula, and rename it back afterwards. > > Thanks for your help. >...

OK, here's the problem. Continuing with your example: strt1 <- lm(y1 ~1, dat) strt2 <- lm(frm1,dat) > strt1 Call: lm(formula = y1 ~ 1, data = dat) Coefficients: (Intercept) 41.73 > strt2 Call: lm(formula = frm1, data = dat) Coefficients: (Intercept) 41.73 Note that the formula objects of the lm object are different: strt2 d...

...s on Y. If p=.5, f1 and f2 have equal impact, for p>.5, f1 has greater impact, for p<.5 f2 has greater impact. I can estimate the model as follows for f1="row", f2="col", Y="nkids": rd<-model.matrix(~as.factor(row)-1) cd<-model.matrix(~as.factor(col)-1) strt<-list(m1=2,m2=2,m3=2,m4=2,m5=3,p=.5) nls(nkids~p*(rd[,1]*m1+rd[,2]*m2+rd[,3]*m3+rd[,4]*m4+rd[,5]*m5) + (1-p)*(cd[,1]*m1+cd[,2]*m2+cd[,3]*m3+cd[,4]*m4+cd[,5]*m5), start=strt) --- What I want however, is a more compact specification, where "row" and "col" are used...

Sorry for post a lot of things, for the first part of code, I copied my C++ iter macro by mistake(and you can see an explicit type casting). Here is the macro definition from R_exts/Itermacros.h #define ITERATE_BY_REGION_PARTIAL(sx, px, idx, nb, etype, vtype, \ strt, nfull, expr) do { \ * const** etype *px = DATAPTR_OR_NULL(sx); * \ if (px != NULL) { \ R_xlen_t __ibr_n__ = strt + nfull; \ R_xlen_t nb = __ibr_n__;...

...> #the real data won't have these names... > > cn <- names(dat) > trg <- "y1" > xvars <- cn[cn!=trg] > > frm1<-as.formula(paste(trg,"~1")) > frm2<-as.formula(paste(trg,"~ 1 + ",paste(xvars,collapse = "+"))) > > strt=lm(y1~1,dat) # boot.stepAIC Works fine > > #strt=do.call("lm",list(frm1,data=dat)) ## boot.stepAIC FAILS ## > > #strt=lm(frm1,dat) ## boot.stepAIC FAILS ## > > limit<-5 > > > stp=stepAIC(strt,direction='forward',steps=limit, > scope=lis...

SImplify your call to lm using the "." argument instead of manipulating formulas. > strt <- lm(y1 ~ ., data = dat) and you do not need to explicitly specify the "1+" on the rhs for lm, so > frm2<-as.formula(paste(trg," ~ ", paste(xvars,collapse = "+"))) works fine, too. Anyway, doing this gives (but see end of output)" bst <- boot.st...

...hese names... >> >> cn <- names(dat) >> trg <- "y1" >> xvars <- cn[cn!=trg] >> >> frm1<-as.formula(paste(trg,"~1")) >> frm2<-as.formula(paste(trg,"~ 1 + ",paste(xvars,collapse = "+"))) >> >> strt=lm(y1~1,dat) # boot.stepAIC Works fine >> >> #strt=do.call("lm",list(frm1,data=dat)) ## boot.stepAIC FAILS ## >> >> #strt=lm(frm1,dat) ## boot.stepAIC FAILS ## >> >> limit<-5 >> >> >> stp=stepAIC(strt,direction='forward',ste...

...ros.h" to loop over an atomic vector. Here is a minimum example: C++ code ``` #include "R_ext/Itermacros.h" #define GET_REGION_BUFSIZE 2 //Redefine the macro since C++ is not happy with the implicit type conversion #define ITERATE_BY_REGION_PARTIAL(sx, px, idx, nb, etype, vtype, \ strt, nfull, expr) do { \ const etype *px = (etype*)DATAPTR_OR_NULL(sx); \ if (px != NULL) { \ R_xlen_t __ibr_n__ = strt + nfull; \ R_xlen_t nb = __ibr_n__; \ for (R_xlen_t idx = strt; idx < __ibr_n__; idx += nb) { \ expr \ } \ } \ else ITERATE_BY_REGION_PARTIAL0(sx, px, idx, nb, etype,...

...gt;> C++ code >> ``` >> #include "R_ext/Itermacros.h" >> #define GET_REGION_BUFSIZE 2 >> //Redefine the macro since C++ is not happy with the implicit type >> conversion >> #define ITERATE_BY_REGION_PARTIAL(sx, px, idx, nb, etype, vtype, \ >> ? strt, nfull, expr) do { \ >> const etype *px = (etype*)DATAPTR_OR_NULL(sx); \ >> if (px != NULL) { \ >> ??? R_xlen_t __ibr_n__ = strt + nfull; \ >> ??? R_xlen_t nb = __ibr_n__; \ >> ??? for (R_xlen_t idx = strt; idx < __ibr_n__; idx += nb) { \ >> expr \ >> ??...

...I copied my > C++ > > iter macro by mistake(and you can see an explicit type casting). Here is > > the macro definition from R_exts/Itermacros.h > > > > #define ITERATE_BY_REGION_PARTIAL(sx, px, idx, nb, etype, vtype, \ > > > > strt, nfull, expr) do { \ > > > > * const** etype *px = DATAPTR_OR_NULL(sx); * > \ > > > > if (px != NULL) { \ > > > > R_xlen_t __ibr_n__ = strt + nfull; \ > &gt...

...ings, for the first part of code, I copied my C++ > iter macro by mistake(and you can see an explicit type casting). Here is > the macro definition from R_exts/Itermacros.h > > #define ITERATE_BY_REGION_PARTIAL(sx, px, idx, nb, etype, vtype, \ > > strt, nfull, expr) do { \ > > * const** etype *px = DATAPTR_OR_NULL(sx); * \ > > if (px != NULL) { \ > > R_xlen_t __ibr_n__ = strt + nfull; \ > > R_xlen_t...

Hi devel team, I'm working on C/C++ level ALTREP compatibility for a package. The package previously used pointers to access the data of a SEXP, so it would not work for some ALTREP objects which do not have a pointer. I plan to rewrite the code and use functions like get_elt, get_region, and get_subset to access the values of a vector, so I have a few questions for ALTREP: 1. Since an

...mber of different ways to do this, and seems to conclude that the positive-definite secant method (BFGS) works best in practice (p201). However, when I run my code through the optim function with the method as "BFGS", slightly different estimates are produced to that of nlm: > optim(strt,jointll2,method="BFGS",hessian=T)$par -0.4016808 0.6057144 0.3744790 -7.1819734 3.0230386 0.4446641 > nlm(jointll2,strt,hessian=T)$estimate [1] -0.4016825 0.6057159 0.3744765 -7.1819737 3.0230386 0.4446623 Can anyone tell me if nlm employs the BFGS method f...

glm(S ~ -1 + Mdif, family=quasipoisson(link=identity), start=strt, sdat) gives error: > Error in glm.fit(x = X, y = Y, weights = weights, start = start, etastart > = > etastart, : > cannot find valid starting values: please specify some strt is set to be the coefficient for a similar fit glm(S ~ -1 + I(Mdif + 1),... i.e. (Mdif + 1) is a vec...

...djusted the frequency of their x-axis label using this package before? I imagine that there must be a better way of doing what I am trying to accomplish, but if not, does anyone have a suggestion on how to work around this without digging into the function itself? ## an example library(tis) strt <- ti(20000101, "monthly") dat <- tis(runif(9*12 - 1), start=strt) # ends in 11/2008 par(mfrow=c(2,1)) tisPlot(dat, xTickFreq="monthly", xTickSkip=6) # graph ends in 11/2008, but looks to start some time in late 1999 tisPlot(dat, xTickFreq="monthly", xTickSkip...

I have a model with quant vars only and the error message does not make sense: (mod1 <- coxph(Surv(time=strt,time2=stp,event=(resp==1))~ +incpost+I(amt/1e5)+rate+strata(termfac), subset=dt<"2010-08-30", data=inc,method="efron")) Call: coxph(formula = Surv(time = strt, time2 = stp, event = (resp == 1)) ~ +incpost + I(amt/1e+05) + rate + strata(termfac), data = inc,...

...s a minimum > example: > > C++ code > ``` > #include "R_ext/Itermacros.h" > #define GET_REGION_BUFSIZE 2 > //Redefine the macro since C++ is not happy with the implicit type > conversion > #define ITERATE_BY_REGION_PARTIAL(sx, px, idx, nb, etype, vtype, \ > strt, nfull, expr) do { \ > const etype *px = (etype*)DATAPTR_OR_NULL(sx); \ > if (px != NULL) { \ > R_xlen_t __ibr_n__ = strt + nfull; \ > R_xlen_t nb = __ibr_n__; \ > for (R_xlen_t idx = strt; idx < __ibr_n__; idx += nb) { \ > expr \ > } \ > } \ > else IT...

...sion(const void * to const int *), see below. While it is allowed in C, C++ seems not happy with it. Is it possible to add an explicit type casting so that it can be compatible with both language? #define ITERATE_BY_REGION_PARTIAL(sx, px, idx, nb, etype, vtype, \ strt, nfull, expr) do { \ *const etype *px = (const** etype *)DATAPTR_OR_NULL(sx); * \ if (px != NULL) { \ R_xlen_t __ibr_n__ = strt + nfull; \ R_xlen_t nb = __ibr_n__;...