Displaying 20 results from an estimated 10000 matches similar to: "missing include in pnorm.c (PR#575)"
2000 Oct 20
1
bug in pnorm (PR#699)
Full_Name: James Michael Rath
Version: all (I think)
OS: doesn't matter
Submission from: (NULL) (129.116.226.162)
The code for pnorm in R was adapted from a Fortran library published in the ACM
TOMS journal. The published version had a typographical error, though, which
was
pointed out in a second article published three years after the original.
The error was that a macro/variable named
2003 Apr 30
1
pnorm conditional (PR#2883)
--=-YFjXKq8/D/t1qWmIzQ9D
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I was going over the source in src/nmath/pnorm.c and noticed a little
bug in pnorm_both (in R 1.7.0). The else-if on line 205 covers the
entire real line. Seems you want an &&, not an ||. Doesn't make a big
difference (you still get a 0 or 1 from extreme starting values) but
your log
2003 Apr 25
4
Kinderman-Ramage (PR#2846)
Hi,
Our department has detected a bug in the implementation of the
Kinderman-Ramage generator for normal random variates in version
1.7.0, which can be seen from the below R session.
(Consecutive calls for chisq.test(...) always gives p-values very
close to 0.)
We have already encountered this bug in version 1.6.2
The error is in file
R-1.7.0/src/nmath/snorm.c
Here is a patch for this file to
2002 Sep 11
1
rational approximations to the normal cdf
In the R source, nmath/pnorm.c contains the
code for a rational function approximation
for the normal cdf. These constants are listed:
const double a[5] = {
2.2352520354606839287,
161.02823106855587881,
1067.6894854603709582,
18154.981253343561249,
0.065682337918207449113
};
The source file cites a paper by Cody (1969)
and states that these
2004 Aug 06
3
Bug in qnorm or pnorm?
I found the following strange behavior using qnorm() and pnorm():
> x<-8.21;x-qnorm(pnorm(x))
[1] 0.0004638484
> x<-8.22;x-qnorm(pnorm(x))
[1] 0.01046385
> x<-8.23;x-qnorm(pnorm(x))
[1] 0.02046385
> x<-8.24;x-qnorm(pnorm(x))
[1] 0.03046385
> x<-8.25;x-qnorm(pnorm(x))
[1] 0.04046385
> x<-8.26;x-qnorm(pnorm(x))
[1] 0.05046385
> x<-8.27;x-qnorm(pnorm(x))
2004 Oct 22
3
pgamma discontinuity (PR#7307)
Full_Name: Morten Welinder
Version: 2
OS: Solaris/space/gcc2.95.2
Submission from: (NULL) (65.213.85.217)
I changed src/nmath/standalone/test.c to read:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
#define MATHLIB_STANDALONE 1
#include <Rmath.h>
#include <stdio.h>
int
main()
{
double x;
for (x = 99990; x <= 100009; x++)
printf
2009 Jul 17
2
how to evaluate character vector within pnorm()
Hi,
I'm trying to evaluate a character vector within pnorm. I have a vector
with values and names
x = c(2,3)
names(x) = c("mean", "sd")
so that i tried the following
temp = paste(names(x), x, sep = "=")
#gives
#> temp
#[1] "mean=2" "sd=3"
#Problem is that both values 2 and 3 are taken as values for the mean
argument in pnorm
pnorm(0,
2010 May 13
1
results of pnorm as either NaN or Inf
I stumbled across this and I am wondering if this is unexpected behavior
or if I am missing something.
> pnorm(-1.0e+307, log.p=TRUE)
[1] -Inf
> pnorm(-1.0e+308, log.p=TRUE)
[1] NaN
Warning message:
In pnorm(q, mean, sd, lower.tail, log.p) : NaNs produced
> pnorm(-1.0e+309, log.p=TRUE)
[1] -Inf
I don't know C and am not that skilled with R, so it would be hard for me
to look into
2000 Jun 16
2
R and OpenBSD
Howdy!
Has anybody successfully installed R under OpenBSD? I just tried to
install the latest R-release under OpenBSD 2.7 and got the following
errors in the make step:
pnorm.c:62 'ML_ERR_return_NAN' undeclared
pnorm.c:62 'ML_NAN' undeclared
pnorm.c:62 'ML_NEGINF' undeclared
--Ragnar
-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-
r-help
2000 Jun 16
2
R and OpenBSD
Howdy!
Has anybody successfully installed R under OpenBSD? I just tried to
install the latest R-release under OpenBSD 2.7 and got the following
errors in the make step:
pnorm.c:62 'ML_ERR_return_NAN' undeclared
pnorm.c:62 'ML_NAN' undeclared
pnorm.c:62 'ML_NEGINF' undeclared
--Ragnar
-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-
r-help
2005 Aug 30
2
about "pnorm"
As to the function"pnorm",the default degree of freedom(df) is infinite.
I wanna know how to set the df as I want.
Help on pnorm doesn't have df setting.The only choice are:"mean, sd, lower.tail, log.p",but no df.
For instance:
sample size=6
df=6-1=5
t value=9.143
I wanna to the corresponding p value by using function "pnorm".
How can I do it?
Thanks a lot
2003 May 22
1
faraway package installation failed (PR#3076)
Full_Name: José Otero
Version: Version 1.5.0 (2002-04-29)
OS: Redhat 7.3
Submission from: (NULL) (192.187.16.164)
Hi:
Installation of package faraway
as root, from tarbal:
R CMD INSTALL ./faraway.tar.gz
ERROR: cannot extract package from './faraway.tar.gz'
idem, from zipped package:
R CMD INSTALL faraway.zip
gzip: faraway.zip has more than one entry--rest ignored
ERROR: cannot
2008 Mar 06
3
1-pnorm values in a table
Hi,
I've read in a csv file (test.csv) which gives me the following table:
Hin1 Hin2 Hin3 Hin4 Hin5 Hin6
HAI1 9534.83 4001.74 157.16 3736.93 484.60 59.25
HAI2 13272.48 1519.88 36.35 33.64 46.68 82.11
HAI3 12587.71 5686.94 656.62 572.29 351.60 136.91
HAI4 15240.81 10031.57 426.73 275.29 561.30 302.38
HAI5 15878.32 10517.14 18.93 22.00 16.91
2002 Feb 13
3
pnorm, relative accuracy in the tails
Dear R people
The function below should be decreasing, convex, and tend to zero when x
tends to infinity.
curve((1-pnorm(x))/dnorm(x),from=0, to=9)
>From the plot we see that for x between 8.0 and 8.3 the function is
fluctuating.
As far as I understand, this is due to the function pnorm() not being
sufficiently accurate in the tails.
I am using pnorm() in a way that has probably not been
2009 Dec 08
4
lower.tail option in pnorm
Hi,
I would have thought that these two constructions would
produce the same result but they do not.
Resp <- rbinom(10, 1, 0.5)
Stim <- rep(0:1, 5)
mm <- model.matrix(~ Stim)
Xb <- mm %*% c(0, 1)
ifelse(Resp, log(pnorm(Xb)), log(1 - pnorm(Xb)))
pnorm(as.vector(Xb), lower.tail = Resp, log.p = TRUE)
> ifelse(Resp, log(pnorm(Xb)), log(1 - pnorm(Xb)))
[1] -0.6931472 -1.8410216
2008 Feb 07
5
pnorm
Dear R list,
I calculated a two-sided p values according to 2*(1-pnorm(8.104474)), which gives 4.440892e-16. However, it appears to be 5.30E-16 by a colleague and 5.2974E-16 from SAS. I tried to get around with mvtnorm package but it turns out to be using pnorm for univariate case. I should have missed some earlier discussions, but for the moment is there any short answer for a higher
2006 Jan 31
1
approximation to ln \Phi(x)
I am using pnorm() with the log.p=T argument to get approximations to ln \Phi(x) and qnorm with the log.p=T argument to get estimates of \Phi^{-1}(exp(x)). What approximations are used in these two functions (I noticed in the source pnorm.c it doesn't look like Abramowitz and Stegen) and where can I find the citation?
Thanks,
Richard Morey
1999 Mar 10
0
[R] bug? and New bug. --- patch for pt() only (PR#138)
The following patch saves pt(), but not the
pf() and pbeta() ones which are harder..
[pbeta(), the incomplete beta ratio is really underlying all these...
needs another asymptotic formula, and it's even harder to decide
WHEN to switch from the (Taylor kind) series to the asymptotic formula
]
This has to wait for a while, unless someone else....
BTW, S-plus also fouls up completely
2004 Oct 28
1
: a package problem
Dear R- users and Helpers:
I downloaded the package from www.stat.lsa.umich.edu/~faraway/book and
installed it from local zip file.
It looked fine. But when I input
library(faraway)
it showed " Error in library(faraway) : 'faraway' is not a valid package
--- installed < 2.0.0?
What I used is R 2.0.0 version now.
What should I do?
Thank you very much.
Xin
2006 Aug 09
1
decimal accuracy in pnorm( )
Dear R users
Is there any way to increase the decimal accuracy for the normal probability distribution? When one needs an accurate p-value for instance this is provided by
pnorm(10,lower.tail=F)
[1] 7.619853e-24
However, what happens when instead of a P[X<x], a more accurate P[X>=x] is the objective.
Thank you in advance for your responses.
Dimitris
[[alternative HTML version