similar to: Using optim with parameters that are factors (instead of continuous parameters)

I have an optimization question that I was hoping to get some suggestions on how best to go about sovling it. I would think there is probably a package that addresses this problem. This is an ordering optimzation problem. Best to describe it with a simple example. Say I have 100 "bins" each with a ball in it numbered from 1 to 100. Each bin can only hold one ball. This optimization is

Dear R users, I am running a maximum likelihood model with optim. I chose the simulated annealing method (method="SANN"). SANN is not performing bad, but I guess it would be much more effecive if I could set the `parscale' parameter. The help sais: `parscale' A vector of scaling values for the parameters. Optimization is performed on `par/parscale' and these

Dear R users, I have a problem for which my objective function depends on both discrete and continuous arguments. The problem is that the number of combinations for the (multivariate) discrete arguments can become overwhelming (when it is univariate this is not an issue) hence search over the continuous arguments for each possible combination of the discrete arguments may not be feasible. Guided

Hi R users, I am trying to restrct the range of two of the parameters in a maximization problem. Both parameters should be between -1 and 1. As far as I know, if I choose the estimation method ="L-BFGS-B" under Optim, I can restrict the parameter space. However, the "L-BFGS-B" always require finite values of the loglik function and cannot get around of the problem if an

Hi all I am trying to solve a combinatorial optimization problem. Basically, I can reduce my problem into the next problem: 1.- Given a NxN grid of points, with some values in each cell 2.- Find the combination of K points on the grid such that, the maximum mean value is obtained I took the Travel SalesMan problem example in ?optim documentation. I am not sure if I have understood correctly

Hi R users, I am using the optim funciton to maximize a log likelihood function. My code is as follows: p<-optim(c(-0.2392925,0.4653128,-0.8332286, 0.0657, -0.0031, -0.00245, 3.366, 0.5885, -0.00008, 0.0786,-0.00292,-0.00081, 3.266, -0.3632, -0.000049, 0.1856, 0.00394, -0.00193, -0.889, 0.5379, -0.000063, 0.213, 0.00338, -0.00026, -0.8912, -0.3023, -0.000056), f,

Hello List I'm working on a combinatoric problem in which the object is to minimize the badness() of a vector. I think this class of problem is only soluble by optim() using method=SANN. The badness() of anything is >= 0, and when I've found a solution with zero badness, I want optim() to stop (carrying on beyond zero badness cannot improve the solution). Efficiency is crucial here.

I think SANN method in optim() is failing to report that it has not converged. Here is an example genrose.f<- function(x, gs=NULL){ # objective function ## One generalization of the Rosenbrock banana valley function (n parameters) n <- length(x) if(is.null(gs)) { gs=100.0 } fval<-1.0 + sum (gs*(x[1:(n-1)]^2 - x[2:n])^2 + (x[2:n] - 1)^2) return(fval) }

Hello, I wonder why the control parameter REPORT is not supported by method SANN. Looking into optim.c I found an internal constant: #define STEPS 100 ... and decreasing this to 10 helped me fine-tuning the annealing parameters in an actual problem. Is there any reason why not passing nREPORT to samin and setting something like: STEPS = nREPORT / tmax Thomas P. -- Thomas Petzoldt

I am trying to control the behavior of the SANN method in optim (R 2.14.1) via control$temp. In my toy tests it works; in my real use, it doesn't. As far as I can tell my code with different temp values is loaded; I even traced into the function that calls optim and verified temp had the value I had set. Could the fact that I have NaN's coming back from the objective function be a

Dear R users, I used to "OPTIM" to minimize the obj. function below. Even though I used the true parameter values as initial values, the results are not very good. How could I improve my results? Any suggestion will be greatly appreciated. Regards, Kathryn Lord #------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ x = c(0.35938587,

Dear R users, I used to "OPTIM" to minimize the obj. function below. Even though I used the true parameter values as initial values, the results are not very good. How could I improve my results? Any suggestion will be greatly appreciated. Regards, Kathryn Lord #------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ x = c(0.35938587,

I have had some weird results using the optim() function. I wrote a probit likelihood and wanted to run it with optim() with simulated data. I did not include a gradient at first and found that optim() would not even iterate using BFGS and would only occasionally work using SANN. I programmed in the gradient and it iterates fine but the estimates it returns are wrong. The simulated data work

Dear All, I am having trouble in using R function "constrOptim" to do constraint optimization. It seems that "constrOptim" calls function "optim" when it does the optimization, and "optim" allows us to set "method" to be "SANN" if we want to use simulated annealing. In "optim", the function allows us to set gradient to be

Hi, dear R users I am a newbie in R and I wantto use the method of meximum likelihood to fit a Weibull distribution to my survival data. I use "optim" as follows: optim(c(1, 0.25),weibull.like,mydata=mydata,method="L-BFGS-B",hessian = TRUE) My question is: how do I setup the constraints so that the two parametrs of Weibull to be pisotive? Or should I use other function

Hi Everyone, I'm trying to minimize a function using constrOptim with the simulated annealing method SANN. If I understand constrOptim well, it basically passes most of its arguments to optim while somehow enforcing the constraints. My problem is, that since SANN does not need gradients, when using optim with SANN, the gr argument of optim is used to specify a function to create the next

> optim(c(1,1),LL,method="SANN",control=list(fnscale=-1),trans=trans,times=times) $par [1] 17.422635 -1.606859 How could i constraint that the parameters should be both positive in my maximizing problem? I check constrOptim but here i could only constraint the variables trans and times and not my parameters? many thanks, regards Christian

I am trying to maximise a complicated loglikelihood function with the "optim" command. Is there some way to get to know the estiamtes at each iteration? When I put "control=list(trace=TRUE)" as an option in "optim", I just got the initial and final values of the loglikelihood, number of iterations and whether the routine has converged or not. I need to know the

optim ignores misspelled control parameters, so that trying to set (e.g.) "maxint=1000" in the control argument silently does nothing. The patch below (watch out for line breaks! also posted at http://www.zoo.ufl.edu/bolker/optim_patch.R , and http://www.zoo.ufl.edu/bolker/optim_new.R) adds three lines to optim.R that issue a warning if any names of elements of "control" fail

Hello, I am trying to fit distribution for data consisting of 421 readings.It is basically no of requests arrived per minute.It contains many 0 entries as no of requests.When i use fd<-fitdistr(V2,"gamma") I get following error: Error in optim(x = c(0L, 0L, 0L, 0L, 0L, 0L, 0L, 0L, 0L, 0L, 0L, 0L, 0L, : initial value in 'vmmin' is not finite What should I do ? I need