similar to: obtaining p-values for lm.ridge() coefficients (package 'MASS')

Hello, I have posted this mail a few days ago but I did it wrong, I hope is right now: I have the following doubts related with lm.ridge, from MASS package. To show the problem using the Longley example, I have the following doubts: First: I think coefficients from lm(Employed~.,data=longley) should be equal coefficients from lm.ridge(Employed~.,data=longley, lambda=0) why it does not happen?

For an application of ridge regression, I need to get the covariance matrices of the estimated regression coefficients in addition to the coefficients for all values of the ridge contstant, lambda. I've studied the code in MASS:::lm.ridge, but don't see how to do this because the code is vectorized using one svd calculation. The relevant lines from lm.ridge, using X, Y are:

Dear r-devel list members, On a couple of occasions I've encountered the issue illustrated by the following examples: --------- snip ----------- > mod.1 <- lm(Employed ~ GNP.deflator + GNP + Unemployed + + Armed.Forces + Population + Year, data=longley) > mod.2 <- update(mod.1, . ~ . - Year + Year) > all.equal(mod.1, mod.2) [1] TRUE > > f <-

Hello dear R help group, I have the following setup to analyse: We have about 150 subjects, and for each subject we performed a pair of tests (under different conditions) 18 times. The 18 different conditions of the test are complementary, in such a way so that if we where to average over the tests (for each subject), we would get no correlation between the tests (between subjects). What we wish

I want to apply Nyblom-Hansen test with the strucchange package, but I don't know how is the correct way and what is the difference between the following two approaches (leeding to different results): data("longley") # 1. Approach: sctest(Employed ~ Year + GNP.deflator + GNP + Armed.Forces, data = longley, type = "Nyblom-Hansen") #results in: # Score-based CUSUM

Dear all, I would like to suggest changing the pairs.formula command such that a command like pairs(GNP ~ . - Year - GNP.deflator, longley) would behave in a similar fashion as lm(GNP ~ . - Year - GNP.deflator, longley) i.e., make a pairwise scatterplot of GNP and all other variables in the (longley) dataframe except for Year and GNP.deflator. The above command, with the

[This question is hopefully straight-forward, but difficult to provide reproducible code.] I'm doing a multivariate bootstrap, using boot::boot(), where the output of the basic computation is a k x p matrix of coefficients, representing a tuning constant x variable, as shown in the $t0 component from my run, giving a 3 x 6 matrix > lboot$t0 GNP Unemployed Armed.Forces

>>>>> Fox, John <jfox at mcmaster.ca> >>>>> on Wed, 13 Sep 2017 22:45:07 +0000 writes: > Dear Terry, > Even the behaviour of lm() and glm() isn't entirely consistent. In both cases, singularity results in NA coefficients by default, and these are reported in the model summary and coefficient vector, but not in the coefficient covariance

Dear Martin, I made three points which likely got lost because of the way I presented them: (1) Singularity is an unusual situation and should be made more prominent. It typically reflects a problem with the data or the specification of the model. That's not to say that it *never* makes sense to allow singular fits (as in the situations you mentions). I'd favour setting

Dear Terry, It's not surprising that different modeling functions behave differently in this respect because there's no articulated standard. Please see my response to Martin for my take on the singular.ok argument. For a highly sophisticated user like you, singular.ok=TRUE isn't problematic -- you're not going to fail to notice an NA in the coefficient vector -- but I've

Dear Terry, Even the behaviour of lm() and glm() isn't entirely consistent. In both cases, singularity results in NA coefficients by default, and these are reported in the model summary and coefficient vector, but not in the coefficient covariance matrix: ---------------- > mod.lm <- lm(Employed ~ GNP + Population + I(GNP + Population), + data=longley) >

>>>>> Fox, John <jfox at mcmaster.ca> >>>>> on Thu, 14 Sep 2017 13:46:44 +0000 writes: > Dear Martin, I made three points which likely got lost > because of the way I presented them: > (1) Singularity is an unusual situation and should be made > more prominent. It typically reflects a problem with the > data or the

>>>>> Martin Maechler <maechler at stat.math.ethz.ch> >>>>> on Thu, 14 Sep 2017 10:13:02 +0200 writes: >>>>> Fox, John <jfox at mcmaster.ca> >>>>> on Wed, 13 Sep 2017 22:45:07 +0000 writes: >> Dear Terry, >> Even the behaviour of lm() and glm() isn't entirely consistent. In both cases,

I'm trying to make a set of contour plots of bivariate kernel density estimates, showing three such plots overlaid, similar to this plot http://euclid.psych.yorku.ca/SCS/Private/Test/ridge-boot2.pdf except that I would like to have the contours *filled* (using transparent colors). To make this reproducible, I've saved the results of KernSmooth::bkde2D() in the following file:

Hi all, I have run a ridge regression as follows: reg=lm.ridge(final$l~final$lag1+final$lag2+final$g+final$u, lambda=seq(0,10,0.01)) Then I enter : select(reg) and it returns: modified HKB estimator is 19.3409 modified L-W estimator is 36.18617 smallest value of GCV at 10 I think it means that it is advisable to

I would like to propose adding a new plot function to the 'graphics' package. The new function is called areaplot() and I have implemented it as a generic function that supports a variety of data classes. An area plot consists of a simple line, like plot(x, y, type="l"), except the area between 0 and the line is a filled polygon. Areas can be stacked on top of each other,

Dear list, I have a couple of questions concerning ridge regression. I am using the lm.ridge(...) function in order to fit a model to my microarray data. Thus *model=lm.ridge(...)* I retrieve some coefficients and some scales for each gene. First of all, I would like to ask: the real coefficients of the model are not included in the first argument of the output but in the result of coef(model),

I'm looking for a function for the 'multiple correlation' but can not figure out what it is called in R by using the html search function. Maybe it is called in another way in english? I only know the german term? Can anyone help me? Thomas Pesl -.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.- r-help mailing list -- Read

Thanks to Andy and Thomas, Reading help(hclust) more carefully would have done it but sometimes you do not see the wood for the trees... So hc$merge does exactly what I want. I have never been aware of the command str to get the structure of an R-object. It seems pretty useful to me. Thanks, Arne > -----Original Message----- > From: Liaw, Andy [mailto:andy_liaw at merck.com] >

Changing library(RODBC,boot) to library(RODBC) library(boot) seems to have solved the problem. _____ _____________________________________________ From: Gary Smith [mailto:gary.smith28 at comcast.net] Sent: Saturday, January 31, 2009 12:55 PM To: 'r-help at R-project.org' Subject: can't get package boot to load Hi, I am new to R and I'm totally confused by this problem.