similar to: help with extended mle package?

So, I've embarked on my threatened modifications to the mle subset of the stats4 package. Most of what I've done so far has *not* been adding the slick formula interface, but rather making it work properly and reasonably robustly with real mle problems -- especially ones involving reasonably complex fixed and default parameter sets. Some of what I've done breaks backward

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

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) {

Full_Name: S?bastien Villemot Version: 2.4.0 OS: Debian testing Submission from: (NULL) (62.212.121.128) Hi, In the mle() function of the stats4 package, there is a bug in the ordering of the variables given in the 'start' argument. By just changing the order of the variables listed in the 'start' list (the initialization values), it is possible to obtain different estimation

As I've mentioned here, before, I'm working on an extended version of mle(), a function from the stats4 package that's a wrapper for optim(). I'd like (against the advice of Peter Dalgaard -- sorry) to incorporate a "data" argument, similar to the arguments in lm, nls, nlme, etc., that would allow the log-likelihood function to be evaluated with different sets of data.

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

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

Thank you very much. now, i call mle(minuslogl=loglik, start=start, method <<- method, fixed=list()) in the mle.wrap() function, and the profile.mle() worked. however, it created a variable named "method" in user workspace. if there had been a variable with same name, then the value of that variable would be destroyed. Is there a way to avoid that happen? Thanks again.

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

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 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

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 there I am trying to learn how to compute mle in R for a multinomial negative log likelihood function. I am using for this the book by B. Bolker "Ecological models and data in R", chapter 6: "Likelihood an all that". But he has no example for multinomial functions. What I did is the following: I first defined a function for the negative log likelihood:

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 below ... If I can I will try to hack the code, but I will probably start by redefining my function with

> 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

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:

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

[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