similar to: Moore-Penrose Generalized determinant?

> Date: Wed, 30 Jun 1999 11:12:24 +0200 (MET DST) > From: Torsten Hothorn <hothorn at amadeus.statistik.uni-dortmund.de> > > yesterday I had a little shock using qr (or lm). having a matrix > > X <- cbind(1,diag(3)) > y <- 1:3 > > the qr.coef returns one NA (because X is singular). So I computed the > Moore-Penrose inverse of X (just from the

?ginv provides 'Modern Applied Statistics with S' (MASS), 3rd, by Venables and Ripley as the sole reference. I happen to have this book (4th ed) on loan from our library, and as far as I can see, ginv is mentioned there twice, and it is *used*, not *explained* in any way. (It is used on p. 148 in the 4th edition.) ginv does not appear in the index of MASS. ginv is an implementation of

>I'm rusty, but not *that* rusty here, I hope. > >If W (=Z*Z' in your case) is singular, it can not have >inverse, which by >definition also mean that nothing multiply by it will >produce the identity >matrix (for otherwise it would have an inverse and >thus nonsingular). > >The definition of a generalized inverse is something >like: If A is a >non-null

I'm implementing a function to compute the moore-penrose inverse, using a code from the article: Fast Computation of Moore-Penrose Inverse Matrices. Neural Information Processing - Letters and Reviews. Vol.8, No.2, August 2005 However, the R presents an error message when I use the geninv. The odd thing is that the error occurs for some arrays, however they have the same size. And the R

I am using the ginv function from MASS and have run across this problem that I do not understand. If I define the matrix A as below, its g-inverse does not satisfy the Moore-Penrose condition A %*% ginv(A) %*% A = A. The matrix A is X'WX in a quadratic regression using some very large dollar values. The much simpler matrix B does satisfy the MP condition. Am I doing something wrong? Is

Dear All, While inverting a matrix the following error appears on my console: Error in solve.default(my_matrix) : Lapack routine dgesv: system is exactly singular With this respect, I have been replacing the solve() function with ginv(): the Moore-Penrose generalized inverse of a matrix. These are the questions I would like to ask you: 1. Would you also replace solve() with ginv() in

Thorsten is right. There is a direct formula for computing the Moore-Penrose inverse using the singular value composition of a matrix. This is incorporated in the following: mpinv <- function(A, eps = 1e-13) { s <- svd(A) e <- s$d e[e > eps] <- 1/e[e > eps] return(s$v %*% diag(e) %*% t(s$u)) } Hope it helps. Dietrich

I cannot find what is the function label for matrix inversion in R. I have found 'ginv' for the moore-penrose in the MASS package, but there is probably a simple inversion operator in the base package. Where can I find it? ____________________________________________ Yvonnick Noel, PhD. University of Lille 3 Department of Psychology F-59653 Villeneuve d'Ascq Cedex (+33) 320 41 63 48

Dear R-devel: I could use some advice about matrix calculations and steps that might make for faster computation of generalized inverses. It appears in some projects there is a bottleneck at the use of svd in calculation of generalized inverses. Here's some Rprof output I need to understand. > summaryRprof("Amelia.out") $by.self self.time self.pct

Dear all; I'm kind of confused with the results obtained using the ginv function from package MASS and pinv function from Matlab. Accroding to the documentation both functions performs a Moore-Penrose generalized inverse of a matrix X. The problem is when I change the tolerance value, say to 1E-3. Here is some output from ginv 195.2674402 235.6758714 335.0830253 8.977515484 -291.7798965

Hi Folks, I'm trying to learn R. One of my intentions is to do some Monte-Carlo type modelling of road "accidents". Below, to simplify things, I've appended a little program which does a 'monte-carlo' type simulation. However, it is written in a way which seems a bit un-natural in R. Could someone help me make this a bit more R-ish please? Or is there a

Speaking of optimization and speeding up R calculations... I mentioned last week I want to speed up calculation of generalized inverses. On Debian Wheezy with R-2.15.2, I see a huge speedup using a souped up generalized inverse algorithm published by V. N. Katsikis, D. Pappas, Fast computing of theMoore-Penrose inverse matrix, Electronic Journal of Linear Algebra, 17(2008), 637-650. I was so

Good evening, Spotted a very minor spelling mistake in the source for the grep help. And thanks to R-Core for all their work - it's a tribute to R-Core, that these sort of "problems" are rare indeed. Best regards, Sean O'Riordain Dublin sean at sean7:~/R/RSVN/R/trunk/src/library/base/man$ svn diff Index: grep.Rd

Good afternoon, This is possibly a windows only bug, definitely of comparatively low importance - but for the sake of completeness here we go. I've searched http://bugs.R-project.org/ etc., but can find no mention. For RGui.exe, the CPU usage goes to 100% for certain dialog boxes for the duration that the dialog box is visible, e.g. * check CPU usage is low * On the RGui.exe menu chose

Good morning, I have currently 63 .csv files most of which have lines which look like 01/06/05,23445 Though some files have two numbers beside each date. There are missing values, and currently the longest file has 318 rows. (merge() is losing the head and doing runaway memory allocation - but thats another question - I'm still trying to pin that issue down and make a small repeatable

### An numeric problem in R ######## ###I have two matrix one is########## A <- matrix(c(21.97844, 250.1960, 2752.033, 29675.88, 316318.4, 3349550, 35336827, 24.89267, 261.4211, 2691.009, 27796.02, 288738.7, 3011839, 31498784, 21.80384, 232.3765, 2460.495, 25992.77, 274001.6, 2883756, 30318645, 39.85801, 392.2341, 3971.349, 40814.22, 423126.2,

I have a simple system of linear equations to solve for X, aX=b: > a [,1] [,2] [,3] [,4] [1,] 1 2 1 1 [2,] 3 0 0 4 [3,] 1 -4 -2 -2 [4,] 0 0 0 0 > b [,1] [1,] 0 [2,] 2 [3,] 2 [4,] 0 (This is ex Ch1, 2.2 of Artin, Algebra). So, 3 eqs in 4 unknowns. One can easily use row-reductions to find a homogeneous solution(b=0) of: X_1

Good morning, I've searched high and low and I've tried many different ways of doing this, but I can't seem to get it to work. I'm looking for a way of vectorising a "running balance"; i.e. the value in the first row of the dataframe is zero, and following rows add to this running balance. This is easy to write in a loop, but I can't seem to get it working in

********************************************************************** This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. ********************************************************************** Hi Just installing R and some

Is there any routine to obtain a g-inverse of a matrix in R or S-PLUS? Tapio Nummi University of Tampere Finland -.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.- r-help mailing list -- Read http://www.ci.tuwien.ac.at/~hornik/R/R-FAQ.html Send "info", "help", or "[un]subscribe" (in the "body", not the subject !) To: