similar to: question about optim

Dear R-users, I would like to maximize the function g above which depends on 4 parameters (2 vectors, 1 real number, and 1 matrix) using optim() and BFGS method. Here is my code: # fonction to maximize g=function(x) { x1 = x[1:ncol(X)] x2 = x[(ncol(X)+1)] x3 = matrix(x[(ncol(X)+2):(ncol(X)+1+ncol(X)*ncol(Y))],nrow=ncol(X),ncol=ncol(Y)) x4 = x[(ncol(X)+1+ncol(X)*ncol(Y)+1):length(x)]

thank you very much for your response! But I have now another problem: optim( ) gives me the exactly same initial values for the 4 parameters. I have tried many initial values, and it always didnt change them. opt$convergence = 1. I increased the number of iterations, but the problem is still there. I also made sure that the function doesnt return "NAN" or "INF" values...

Hi there, I have some data which are convenient to enter as lists. For example: t1<-list(fname="animal1",testname="hyla",dspkr="left",res1=39.7,res2=15.0) t2<-list(fname="animal1",testname="bufo",dspkr="left",res1=14.4,res2=56.1)

Hi R helpers! I have a question. I'm trying to create a function for an exercise. Here are the arguments I should include: x and y are numeric z is a name ("plus","minus","multiply","divide") and swap is logical. Here is what the function should do: When z="plus", then x+y is performed and so on for the other z names. It should give a NA

Dear R users, I have a data structure as follows: id two res1 res2 c1 c2 inter 1 -0.786093166 1 0 1 2 6 3 -0.308495749 1 0 0 1 2 5 -0.738033048 1 0 0 0 1 7 -0.52176252 1 0

I am using R 1.1 with Redhat 6.2 and RW 1.001 with Win98 (the upkey doesn't work on my IBM either as has been previously reported by others). The function aov doesn't return either the residuals or the residual degrees of freedom for split-plot designs. If you use the following code from Baron and Li's "Notes on the use of R for psycology experiments and questionnaires"

Hi, dat1<- read.table(text=" id??????????????? t???????????????????? scores 2???????????????? 0??????????????????????? 1.2 2???????????????? 2???????????????????????? 2.3 2???????????????? 3??????????????????????? 3.6 2???????????????? 4??????????????????????? 5.6 2???????????????? 6??????????????????????? 7.8 3???????????????? 0??????????????????????? 1.6 3????????????????

Hi, I am new to clustering and was wondering why pvclust using "maximum" as distance measure nearly always results in p-values above 95%. I wrote an example programme which demonstrates this effect. I uploaded a PDF showing the results Here is the code which produces the PDF file: ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- s <-

Hi, I use lme to fit models like R> res1 <- lme(y~A+B, data=mydata, random=~1|subject) R> res2 <- lme(y~B+A, data=mydata, random=~1|subject) (only difference between these two models are the sequence in which the indep variables are written in formula) where y is continuous and A, B, and subject are factors. To get ANOVA table I used R> anova(res1) R> anova(res2) and found

Dear R-users I have a problem choosing initial points for the function arms() in the package HI I intend to implement a Gibbs sampler and one of my conditional distributions is nonstandard and not logconcave. Therefore I'd like to use arms. But there seem to be a strong influence of the initial point y.start. To show the effect I constructed a demonstration example. It is reproducible

I initially thought, this should better be posted to r-devel but alas! no response. so I try it here. sory for the lengthy explanation but it seems unavoidable. to quickly see the problem simply copy the litte example below and execute f(n=5) which crashes. called with n != 5 (and of course n>3 since there are 3 parameters in the model...) everything is as it should be. in detail:

Hi, It would be better if you provided the output of dput(dataset).? I am not sure about the structure of your dataset. Just from reading the data as is shown. dat1<- read.table(text=" separator,tissID >,>,2 ,2,1 ,6,5 ,11,13 >,>,4 ,4,9 ,6,2 ,7,3 ,21,1 ,23,58 ,25,9 ,26,4 >,>,11 ,1,12 >,>,21 ,4,1 ,11,3

Dear R-Users, I want to use mtable from package "memisc" to produce Latex-style estimation output. However, mtable() only gives me a p-value and not the corresponding test-statistic. Does anyone know how to extract it, either from a glm/anova object or mtable? Here is a short example: # Run this #################### install.packages("memisc") library(memisc) set.seed(1)

Deal all, as MCMClogit does not allow for the specification of several chains, I have run my model 3 times with different random number seeds and differently dispersed multivariate normal priors. For example: res1 = MCMClogit(y~x,b0=0,B0=0.001,data=mydat, burnin=500, mcmc=5500, seed=1234, thin=5) res2 = MCMClogit(y~x,b0=1,B0=0.01,data=mydat, burnin=500, mcmc=5500, seed=5678, thin=5) res3 =

Hi, I am trying to run the command "forward.sel.par," however I receive the error message: "Error: could not find function 'simpleRDA2'." I have the vegan library loaded. The documentation on "varpart" has not helped me to understand why I cannot call this function. Maybe I am missing something obvious because I am still an 'R' novice. Below is a

I am trying to run separate regressions for different groups of observations using the lapply function. It works fine when I write the formula inside the lm() function. But I would like to pass formulae into lm(), so I can do multiple models more easily. I got an error message when I tried to do that. Here is my sample code: #generating data x1 <- rnorm(100,1) x2 <- rnorm(100,1) y <-

What is going on here? In the lines ending in #### the inputs and outputs are identical yet one gives a warning and the other does not. a1 <- `rownames<-`(anscombe[1:3, ], NULL) a2 <- anscombe[1:3, ] ix <- 5:8 # input arguments to #### are identical in both cases identical(stack(a1[ix]), stack(a2[ix])) ## [1] TRUE identical(a1[-ix], a2[-ix]) ## [1] TRUE res1 <-

They differ in whether the row names are "automatic": > .row_names_info(a1) [1] -3 > .row_names_info(a2) [1] 3 Best, -Deepayan On Tue, 14 Nov 2023 at 08:23, Gabor Grothendieck <ggrothendieck at gmail.com> wrote: > > What is going on here? In the lines ending in #### the inputs and outputs > are identical yet one gives a warning and the other does not. > >

Hello, I have been studying LLVM and started to create a new backend for a new RISC architecture. Now I need some help to get forward with my project. I'm quite new to compiling techniques so I'm sorry for the stupid questions. Question 1: My idea is to lower the select SDNode as follows: %res1 = %falseVal %res2 = setc %trueVal, %condition Where setc is conditional mov. The

In that case identical should be FALSE but it is TRUE identical(a1, a2) ## [1] TRUE On Tue, Nov 14, 2023 at 8:58?AM Deepayan Sarkar <deepayan.sarkar at gmail.com> wrote: > > They differ in whether the row names are "automatic": > > > .row_names_info(a1) > [1] -3 > > .row_names_info(a2) > [1] 3 > > Best, > -Deepayan > > On Tue, 14 Nov