similar to: Optimzing a nested function

Dear colleagues, I've been searching for information on the Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) Measure of Sampling Adequacy (MSA). This statistic is generated in SPSS and is often used to determine if a dataset is "appropriate" for factor analysis -- it's true utility seems quite low, but it seems to come up in stats classes a lot. It did in mine, and a glance through the R-help

I get the failure message. To be specific: adcomp.git>R CMD BATCH --quiet test_nlminb.R adcomp.git>cat test_nlminb.Rout > f <- function(x) sum( log(diff(x)^2+.01) + (x[1]-1)^2 ) > opt <- nlminb(rep(0, 10), f, lower=-1, upper=3) > xhat <- rep(1, 10) > abs( opt$objective - f(xhat) ) < 1e-4? ## Must be TRUE [1] FALSE My system is described by: adcomp.git>uname

I have written some programs in Common Lisp and I have been using SAS to pipe those programs to my lisp compiler in batch mode by using the %xlog and %xlst SAS commands. I wonder if there is in R a similar way to pipe commands to LISP so that all my work would be concentrated in R even when I have to call a LISP program? I have looked at the foreign library but this seems to adjust data types not

Hi All, How do i calculate KMO for a dataset? *Dataset:---------------------* m1 m2 m3 m4 m5 m6 m7 m8 1 2 20 20 2 1 4 14 12 2 9 16 3 5 2 5 5 15 3 18 18 18 13 17 9 2 4 4 7 7 2 12 2 11 11 11 5 7 8 5 19 5 2 20 18 6 7 4 7 4 7 9 3 3 7 5 5 5 12 5 13 13 12 8 6 6 4 3 5 17 17 16 9 12 12 4 2 4 4 14 14 10 5 14

This is a follow-up question for PR#15052 <http://bugs.r-project.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=15052> There is another thing I would like to discuss wrt how nlminb() should proceed with NAs. The question is: What would be a successful way to deal with an evaluation point of the objective function where the gradient and the hessian are not well defined? If the gradient and the hessian both

Hello I want to use the nlminb function but I have the objective function like characters. I can summarize the problem using the first example in the nlminb documentation. x <- rnbinom(100, mu = 10, size = 10) hdev <- function(par) -sum(dnbinom(x, mu = par[1], size = par[2], log = TRUE)) nlminb(c(9, 12), objective=hdev) With the last instructions we obtain appropriate results. If I have

I use lmer to fit a mixed effect model.It give some warnings.what does this warnings mean? and what should I do? > (fm2.mlm <- lmer(qd ~ edu + jiankang + peixun +hunyin + cadcj + age + age2 + sex + dangyuan + Comp.1 + Comp.2+trust.cz1 +(trust.cz1|commid), data = individual,na.action = "na.exclude",family="quasibinomial")) Generalized linear mixed model fit using PQL

Dear R developers, I tried to use nlminb instead of optim for a current problem (fitting parameters of a differential equation model). The PORT algorithm converged much better than any of optim's methods and the identified parameters are plausible. However, it took me a while before spotting the reason of a technical problem that nlminb, in contrast to optim, does not pass names of the

Dear R users, I am trying to fit a GLMM to the following dataset; tab a b c 1 1 0.6 199320100313 2 1 0.8 199427100412 3 1 0.8 199427202112 4 1 0.2 199428100611 5 1 1.0 199428101011 6 1 0.8 199428101111 7 0 0.8 199527103011 8 1 0.6 199527200711 9 0 0.8 199527202411 10 0 0.6 199529100412 11 1 0.2 199626201111 12 2 0.8 199627200612 13 1 0.4 199628100111 14 1 0.8

Good day, Here I was trying to write a code for Garch(1,1) . As garch problem is more or less an optimization problem I also tried to get the algorithm for "nlminb" function. What I saw that if use this function 'nlminb" I can easyly get the estimate of parameters. But any other function is not working. I tried to write my own code for optimization using Quasi-Newton

I am using R 2.7.0 on a linux platform. I am trying to reproduce a 2002 example using lme from the nlme library. I want to change the otimizer from the default (nlminb) to optim. Specifically, this is what I am trying to do: R> library(nlme) R> library(car) # for data only R> data(Blackmoor) # from car R> Blackmoor$log.exercise <- log(Blackmoor$exercise + 5/60, 2) R>

#optim package estimate<-optim(init.par,Linn,hessian=TRUE, method=c("L-BFGS-B"),control = list(trace=1,abstol=0.001),lower=c(0,0,0,0,-Inf,-Inf,-Inf,-Inf,-Inf,-Inf,-Inf,-Inf,-Inf),upper=c(1,1,1,1,Inf,Inf,Inf,Inf,Inf,Inf,Inf,Inf,Inf)) #nlminb package estimate<-nlminb(init.par,Linn,gr=NULL,hessian=TRUE,control =

Hi Everybody, My problem is that nlminb doesn't converge, in minimising a logLikelihood function, with 31*6 parameters(2 weibull parameters+29 regressors repeated 6 times). I use nlminb like this : res1<-nlminb(vect, V, lower=c(rep(0.01, 12), rep(0.01, 3), rep(-Inf, n-15)), upper=c(rep(Inf, 12), rep(0.99, 3), rep(Inf, n-15)), control = list(maxit=1000) ) and that's the result :

Hello splus-users, I am trying to fit a regression model for an ordered response factor. So I am using the function polr in library(MASS). My data is a matrix of 1665 rows and 63 columns (one of the column is the dependent variable). The code I use is polr(as.ordered(q23p)~.,data=newdatap) but I am getting the following warning message singularity encountered in: nlminb.1(temp, p, liv, lv,

Dear R-users I am trying to find a value for the risk free rate minimizing the difference between a BS call value with impl. volatilities minus the market price of a call (assuming this is just the average bid ask price) Here is my data: http://r.789695.n4.nabble.com/file/n3747509/S%26P_500_calls%2C_jan-jun_2010.csv S%26P_500_calls%2C_jan-jun_2010.csv S0 <- 1136.03 q <- 0.02145608 S0

I am using both nlminb and optim to get MLEs from a likelihood function I have developed. AFAIK, the model I has not been previously used in this way and so I am struggling a bit to unit test my code since I don't have another data set to compare this kind of estimation to. The likelihood I have is (in tex below) \begin{equation} \label{eqn:marginal} L(\beta) = \prod_{s=1}^N \int

Dear list, Here's a suggestion about the different optimization code. There are several optimization procedures in the base package (optim, optimize, nlm, nlminb, ..). However, the output of these functions are slightly different. For instance, 1. optim returns a list with arguments par (the estimates), value the minimum (maxima) of the objective function, convergence (optim

All, I have been able to successfully use the optim( ) function with "L-BFGS-B" to find reasonable parameters for a one-compartment open pharmacokinetic model. My loss function in this case was squared error, and I made no assumptions about the distribution of the plasma values. The model appeared to fit pretty well. Out of curiosity, I decided to try to use nlminb( ) applied to a

On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 07:52:56PM -0400, Duncan Murdoch wrote: > On 14/07/2015 6:08 PM, Radford Neal wrote: > > In testing pqR on Solaris SPARC systems, I have found two bugs that > > are also present in recent R Core versions. You can see the bugs and > > fixes at the following URLs: > > > >

Dear R community, I'm fitting a complex mixed-effects model that requires numerous iterations and function evaluations. I note that nlminb accepts a list of control parameters, including eval.max. Is there a way to change the default eval.max value for nlminb when it is being called from lme? Thanks for any thoughts, Andrew -- Andrew Robinson Department of Mathematics and Statistics