similar to: Parametric links for glm?

Here's a patch that should make predict.glm(..., type="response") retain the names. The change passes make check on our Opteron running SLES9. One simple test is: names(predict(glm(y ~ x, family=binomial, data=data.frame(y=c(1, 0, 1, 0), x=c(1, 1, 0, 0))), newdata=data.frame(x=c(0, 0.5, 1)), type="response")) which gives [1]

Greetings: I'm running R2.6.2 on a WinXP DELL box with 2 gig RAM. I have created a new glm link function to be used with family = binomial. The function works (although any suggested improvements would be welcome), logit.FC <- function(POD.floor = 0, POD.ceiling =1) { if (POD.floor < 0 | POD.floor > 1) stop ("POD.floor must be between zero and one.") if

Hi, I wish to write a new link function for a GLM. R's glm routine does not supply the "loglog" link. I modified the make.link function adding the code: }, loglog = { linkfun <- function(mu) -log(-log(mu)) linkinv <- function(eta) exp(-exp(-eta)) mu.eta <- function(eta) exp(-exp(-eta)-eta) valideta <- function(eta) all(eta != 0)

Greetings, everyone. I've been trying to analyze bird nest survival data using generalized linear mixed models (because we documented several consecutive nesting attempts by the same individuals; i.e. repeated measures data) and have been unable to persuade the various GLMM models to work with my user-defined link function. Actually, glmmPQL seems to work, but as I want to evaluate a suite of

Dear all I am using NAMESPACE in my package but I would like the user to be able to overwrite four functions: own.linkfun, own.linkinv, own.mu.eta and own.valideta. These are used to defined "own" link functions. Is there any way of doing that without getting the when I am checking the package? This is what I am getting: make.link.gamlss : linkfun: no visible binding for global

G'day all, I had a look at the GLM code of R (1.4.1) and I believe that there are problems with the function "glm.fit" that may bite in rare circumstances. Note, I have no data set with which I ran into trouble. This report is solely based on having a look at the code. Below I append a listing of the glm.fit function as produced by my system. I have added line numbers so that I

Dear list, I'm trying to mimic the analysis of Wedderburn (1974) as cited by McCullagh and Nelder (1989) on p.328-332. This is the leaf-blotch on barley example, and the data is available in the `faraway' package. Wedderburn suggested using the variance function mu^2(1-mu)^2. This variance function isn't readily available in R's `quasi' family object, but it seems to me

Dear R users, I'm struggling with applying a user-defined link function in lmer. For analyzing data of a 2AFC psychophysical experiment, I would like to model my binary data with a logistic function with a lower limit at 0.5 instead of 0. In a previous question this has been described as a halflogit function. To do so I wrote my own link function and would like to submit it to lmer, however

Hi, I am trying to run two Non-Gaussian regressions: logistic and probit. I am receiving two different errors when I try to run these regressions and I am not sure what they mean or how to fix my syntax. Here is the logistic regression error: Error in family$linkfun(mustart) : Argument mu must be a nonempty numeric vector Here is the probit regression error: Error in pmax(eta, -thresh) :

Hello List, I am modeling a binomial response (nest survival) and I want to incorporate a random effect, in this case site. I had previously been using glm with a custom link function, but my understanding is that lmer does not currently allow a custom link. Therefore, I was investigating if other procedures for mixed models will allow a custom link function. here is the custom link function:

Hello All, I am looking for an R library/function that allows the specification of a custom link function in a linear mixed model. I've been using glm() in library MASS to fit fixed-effect models with a custom link but my study design demands mixed models. Any suggestions on the best R library/function to achieve this would be greatly appreciated. I have tried, to no avail, to

I would like to do an R glm() with family = binomial(link="loglog") Right now, the cloglog link exists, which is nice when the data have a heavy tail to the left. I have the opposite case and the loglog link is what I need. Can someone suggest how to add the loglog link onto glm()? It would be lovely to have it there by default, and it certainly makes sense to have the two opposite

Dear R-Users, I wish to create a new family object based on the Binomial family. The only difference will be with the link function. Thus instead if using the 'logit(u)' link function, i plan to use '-log(i-u)'. So far, i have tried to write the function following that of the Binomial and Negative Binomial families. The major problem i have here is with the definition of the

Hi all I am converting an S-Plus function into R. The S-Plus code uses some of the glm families, and family objects. The family objects in S-Plus and R have many different features, for example: In R: > names(Gamma()) [1] "family" "link" "linkfun" "linkinv" "variance" [6] "dev.resids" "aic"

Hi to every body. I would like assistance on how to implement the log-log link function for binary response. Is there any package that implements it? Many thanks Endy [[alternative HTML version deleted]]

under "Details" (version 2015-11-29 r69717; not quite cutting-edge, but nothing has changed in src/library/stats/man/family.Rd in 5 months [sorry for using the Github mirror, but I prefer the interface ... <https://github.com/wch/r-source/blob/trunk/src/library/stats/man/family.Rd>]) it says: valid.mu: logical function. Returns ?TRUE? if a mean vector ?mu? is within the

I know this has been dealt with before on this list, but the previous messages lacked detail, and I haven't figured it out yet. The model is: \x_{ij} = \mu + \alpha_i + \beta_j \alpha is a random effect (subjects), and \beta is a fixed effect (condition). I have a link function: p_{ij} = .5 + .5( 1 / (1 + exp{ -x_{ij} } ) ) Which is simply a logistic transformed to be between .5 and 1.

I apologize for my earlier posting that, unbeknownst to me before, apparently was not in the correct format for this list. Hopefully this attempt will go through, and no-one will hold the newbie mistake against me. I could really use some help in writing a new glm link function in order to run an analysis of daily nest survival rates. I've struggled with this for weeks now, and can at least

> From: Ross Darnell > > Liaw, Andy wrote: > >>From: Liaw, Andy > >> > >> > >>>From: Ross Darnell > >>> > >>>A good point but what is the value of storing a large set of > >>>predicted > >>>values when the values of the explanatory variables are lost > >>>(predicted >

Dear R users I have been looking for functions that can deal with overdispersed poisson models. Some (one) of the observations are negative. According to actuarial literature (England & Verall, Stochastic Claims Reserving in General Insurance , Institute of Actiuaries 2002) this can be handled through the use of quasi likelihoods instead of normal likelihoods. The presence of negatives is not