similar to: overhaul of mle

I'm trying to figure out the best way of fitting the same negative log-likelihood function to more than one set of data, using mle() from the stats4 package. Here's what I would have thought would work: -------------- library(stats4) ## simulate values r = rnorm(1000,mean=2) ## very basic neg. log likelihood function mll <- function(mu,logsigma) {

Hi I have the following formula (I hope it is clear - if no, I can try to do better the next time) h(x, a, b) = integral(0 to pi/2) ( ( integral(D/sin(alpha) to Inf) ( ( f(x, a, b) ) dx ) dalpha ) and I want to do an mle with it. I know how to use mle() and I also know about integrate(). My problem is to give the parameter values a and b to the

Hi the list, I would need some advice on something that looks like a FAQ: the possibility of providing vectors to optim() function. Here is a stupid and short example summarizing the problem: -------------------------------- example 1 ------------ 8< ---------------------- library(stats4) data <- rnorm(100,0,1) lik1 <- function(m, v, data) { N <- length(data) lik.mean <-

Hello fellow R users, Below are two cases using the "mle" operation from the stats4 package. In CASE 1 the code runs fine, in CASE 2 errors occur: CASE 1 x, alpha_current, s, and n are vectors of the same length. ll_beta<-function(b0=0,b1=0) -sum(s*b0+s*b1*x+s*alpha_current-n*log(1+exp(b0+b1*x+alpha_current))) fit_beta<-mle(ll_beta) CASE 2 The error message is as follows

Hi, There is something I don't get with object of class "mle" returned by a function I wrote. More precisely it's about the behaviour of method "confint" and "profile" applied to these object. I've written a short function (see below) whose arguments are: 1) A univariate sample (arising from a gamma, log-normal or whatever). 2) A character string

>Y [,1] [,2] [,3] [1,] 0 1 0 [2,] 0 1 0 [3,] 0 0 1 [4,] 1 0 0 [5,] 0 0 1 [6,] 0 0 1 [7,] 1 0 0 [8,] 1 0 0 [9,] 0 0 1 [10,] 1 0 0 >X pri82 pan82 1 0 0 2 0 0 3 1 0 4 1 0 5 0 1 6 0 0 7 1 0 8 1 0 9 0 0 10

Dear R developers, I noticed a bug in the stats4 package, specifically in the confint method applied to ?mle? objects. In particular, when some ?fixed? parameters define the log likelihood, these parameters are stored within the mle object but they are not used by the ?confint" method, which retrieves their value from the global environment (whenever they still exist). Sample code: >

Hi everyone! I am using the mle {stats4} to estimate the parameters of distributions by MLE method. I have a problem with the examples they provided with the mle{stats4} html files. Please check the example and my question below! *Here is the mle html help file * http://stat.ethz.ch/R-manual/R-devel/library/stats4/html/mle.html http://stat.ethz.ch/R-manual/R-devel/library/stats4/html/mle.html

I have an issue using mle in versions of 32 bits. I am writing a package which I want to submit to the CRAN. When doing the check, there is an example that has an error running in the 32 bits version. The problem comes from the mle function, using it with a lower constrain. In 64 bits version it works fine but when I put it in the R 32 bits it fails. (same numbers, all equal!) The call is:

A while back, I wrote to the list/engaged in some debate with Peter Dalgaard about the mle() function in the stats4 package -- in particular, I wanted it to have a data= argument so that parameters could be estimated for different sets of data with the same minuslogl function: Peter disagreed, suggesting that a function-defining-function (e.g. something like minusloglfun <- function(data) {

> On May 27, 2018, at 10:31 PM, francesc badia roca <fbr600 at gmail.com> wrote: > > I have an issue using mle in versions of 32 bits. > > I am writing a package which I want to submit to the CRAN. > When doing the check, there is an example that has an error running in the > 32 bits version. > > The problem comes from the mle function, using it with a lower

Hi! This is a repost of an earlier message (with a clearer example demonstrating the problem I ran into). If you run the mle example in stats4 library(stats4) x <- 0:10 y <- c(26, 17, 13, 12, 20, 5, 9, 8, 5, 4, 8) ll <- function(ymax=15, xhalf=6) -sum(stats::dpois(y, lambda=ymax/(1+x/xhalf), log=TRUE)) (fit <- mle(ll)) plot(profile(fit),

Dears useRs, I am using the mle function but this gives me the follow erros that I don't understand. Perhaps there is someone that can help me. thank you for you atention. Bernardo. > erizo <- read.csv("Datos_Stokes_1.csv", header = TRUE) > head(erizo) EDAD TALLA 1 0 7.7 2 1 14.5 3 1 16.9 4 1 13.2 5 1 24.4 6 1 22.5 > TAN <-

Hi there, When I do bootstrap on a maximum likelihood estimation, I try the following code, however, I get error: Error in minuslogl(alpha = 0, beta = 0) : object "x" not found It seems that mle() only get data from workspace, other than the boot.fun(). My question is how to pass the data to mle() in my case. I really appreciated to any suggestions. Best wishes, Jinsong

Hi I am doing several mle and want to store them in a list (or whatever is the right construct) to be able to analyse them later. at the moment I am doing: f <- list() f$IP <- mle(...) f$NE <- mle(...) but when I say: > summary(f) I get: Length Class Mode IP 0 mle list NE 0 mle list I don't get the output I would have, i.e. the one from >

Hi there, I ran the following code: vols=read.csv(file="C:/Documents and Settings/Hugh/My Documents/PhD/Swaption vols.csv" , header=TRUE, sep=",") X<-ts(vols[,2]) #X dcOU<-function(x,t,x0,theta,log=FALSE){ Ex<-theta[1]/theta[2]+(x0-theta[1]/theta[2])*exp(-theta[2]*t) Vx<-theta[3]^2*(1-exp(-2*theta[2]*t))/(2*theta[2]) dnorm(x,mean=Ex,sd=sqrt(Vx),log=log) }

my problem actually arised with fitting the data to the weibulldistribution, where it is hard to see, if the proposed parameterestimates make sense. data1:2743;4678;21427;6194;10286;1505;12811;2161;6853;2625;14542;694;11491; ?? ?? ?? ?? ?? 14924;28640;17097;2136;5308;3477;91301;11488;3860;64114;14334 how am I supposed to know what starting values i have to take? i get different

I sent this in first on 30 July. Now that UseR! is over I'm trying again (slightly extended version from last time). With R 2.5.1 or R 2.6.0 (2007-08-04 r42421) "L-BFGS-B" behaves differently from all of the other optim() methods, which return the value of the function when they are given a trivial function (i.e., one with no variable arguments) to optimize. This is not a bug in

Dear R users, I am new to R. I would like to find *maximum likelihood estimators for psi and alpha* based on the following *log likelihood function*, c is consumption data comprising 148 entries: fn<-function(c,psi,alpha) { s1<-sum(for(i in 1:n){(c[i]-(psi^(-1/alpha)*(lag(c[i],-1))))^2* (lag(c[i],-1)^((-2)*(alpha+1)) )}); s2<- sum(for(m in 1:n){log(lag(c[m],-1)^(((2)*alpha)+2))});

[posted to R-devel, no discussion: resubmitting it as a bug, just so it gets logged appropriately] Sorry to report further difficulties with nls and profiling and constraints ... the problem this time (which I didn't check for in my last round of testing) is that the nls profiler doesn't seem to respect constraints that have been set when using the port algorithm. See test code