similar to: Boxplot issues (formerly posted to R-help in error)

Boxplot and bxp seem to have changed behaviour a bit of late (R 2.4.1). Or maybe I am mis-remembering. An annoying feature is that while at=3:6 will work, there is no way of overriding the default xlim of 0.5 to n+0.5. That prevents plotting boxes on, for example, interval scales - a useful thing to do at times. I really can see no good reason for bxp to hard-core the xlim=c(0.5, n+0.5) in the

Full_Name: Steve Ellison Version: 2.4.1 OS: Windows, Linux Submission from: (NULL) (194.73.101.157) bxp() allows specifcation of box locations with at=, but neither adjusts xlim= to fit at nor does it respect xlim provided explicitly. This is because bxp() now includes explicit xlim as c(0.5, n+0.5), without checking for explicitly supplied xlim (or ylim if horizontal). This also prevents

Hi All, As a follow-on from the mail below, it is possible to have boxplots based on means and variance for more than one input, i.e., bxp(input1,input2,....) Thanks in Advance, Dermot ******** Previous Mail on this subject *********** >I have a couple more questions about boxplots. In the books I've read on >statistics (I'm not a statistics expert but just a poor engineer

----------------------- *** Disclaimer *** ----------------------- This e-mail and its contents are subject to the SA Reserve Bank's Disclaimer and Confidentiality Clause, which can be viewed at: http://www.reservebank.co.za/disclaimer Should you be unable to access the link provided, please send a blank e-mail to Disclaimer@resbank.co.za ----------------------- *** Disclaimer ***

A student asked me if it was possible to draw boxplots where the boxes themselves were grouped: I was able to hack boxplot.formula() to do the right thing, more or less, by incorporating an argument (space) and some code from barplot. with the extended boxplot.formula() below, the following commands "do the right thing" (produce boxes grouped by levels of the second factor): r =

I''d like to make the following changes (differences are from R1.0.1): boxplot.default() 1c1 < function (x, ..., range = 1.5, width = NULL, varwidth = FALSE, --- > function (x, ..., range = 1.5, width = NULL, varwidth = FALSE, boxwex=0.8, 37c37,38 < bxp(groups, width, varwidth = varwidth, notch = notch, --- > bxp(groups, width, varwidth = varwidth,

There seems to be a problem with partial matching of argument names in boxplot(), in respect of the "horizontal" argument. I don't recall seeing this issue discussed previously. My apologies if I am being redundant. (A scan of CRAN revealed that someone had experienced problems with the "horizontal" argument, but he was spelling it out in full, so that was a different

(as the subject says) It makes sense to add (say k) boxplots to a given plot, using the given coordinate system. Currently, the calling sequence boxplot -> boxplot.default() -> bxp() [modeled after S] doesn't allow this, since bxp() explicitly sets up the coordinate system. One way would be to add an "add = TRUE" argument to boxplot(.) and bxp(.) and then additionally

>[Rd] boxplot() defaults {was "boxplot in extreme cases"} >Martin Maechler maechler at stat.math.ethz.ch >Mon Nov 8 10:36:42 CET 2004 > > AndyL> Try: > > AndyL> x <- list(x1=rep(c(0,1,2),c(10,20,40)), > x2=rep(c(0,1,2),c(10,40,20))) > AndyL> boxplot(x, pars=list(medpch=20, medcex=3)) > > AndyL> (Cf ?bxp, pointed to from

Hola, por mi parte doy por zanjado el tema. He llegado a la causa raíz de mi problema: falta de conocimiento de la forma en la que se debe usar la ayuda de las funciones de R y gracias a vuestra colaboración, ¡ya se cómo hacerlo :) !   Nuevamente,gracias a todos. Saludos,   Fernando   -- ____________________________________   Hola,   La misma función boxplot indica la existencia de estas

It's not new anyway. You see the same behaviour with boxplot(dat, ylab=quote(X[2])) and it boils down to the use of do.call("bxp", ...) in the internals. As a general matter, expression() exists to prevent this sort of confusion, e.g., in this construction, > X <- quote(Y+1); bquote(f(.(X))) f(Y + 1) is indistinguishable from just entering f(Y+1), so f has no way of

Hi all! I would like to import a matlab or gauss code to R. Could you help me? Bye, Sebasti?n. 2007/6/23, r-help-request en stat.math.ethz.ch <r-help-request en stat.math.ethz.ch>: > Send R-help mailing list submissions to > r-help en stat.math.ethz.ch > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit >

Dear r-bugs, I'd like to be able to draw boxplots with solid or dotted whisker lines. The lty argument is currently ignored by boxplot(), and indeed hardwired in bxp(). It's not very difficult to customize these functions to generate various types of boxplots, but generally it might be an idea to allow the user to pass a few more graphical arguments to boxplot(). The approach might as

mybp <- boxplot(count ~ geno * tissue, data = mydata, plot = FALSE) mybp$names <- gsub("\\.", "\n", mybp$names) bxp(mybp) See ?boxplot for details. Best, Ista On Thu, Sep 28, 2017 at 12:40 PM, Ed Siefker <ebs15242 at gmail.com> wrote: > I have data I'd like to plot using the formula interface to boxplot. > I call boxplot like so: > > with(mydata,

Hi, the graphical parameter "cex.axis" does not have any affect for "boxplot": data(iris) boxplot(iris[,1:4], ylab="y", cex.lab=2, cex.axis=2) The patch is simply adding "cex.axis" to the search for axis relevant parameters in "bxp": ax.pars <- pars[names(pars) %in% c("xaxt", "yaxt", "las",

Dear R-core team, I think I found a small inconsistency in the boxplot function. I don't want to post it as a bug since I'm not sure this might be considered as one according to the FAQ --- and this is not a major problem. Don't hesitate to tell me if I'm wrong. If you try to do a boxplot on a matrix and set the "at" argument to some vector different from 1:n, n is the

Hi folks, I have a vaiable Y and an associated factor Z at several (13) levels. boxplot(Y~Z) produces a nice array of boxplots, one for each level of Z, and each duly labaelled with its level of Z. I would like to superpose on each boxplot the actual data points which it represents, i.e. do something conceptually (though not in real R) expressed as points(Y~Z) or points(Z,Y) It can

When plotting using the cex.axis argument to boxplot(), the size of the plotting symbols beyond the whiskers of the boxplot are being changes. Example: par(mfrow=c(2,1)) boxplot(c(rnorm(10), 10), horizontal=TRUE, main="Test", las=2, cex.axis=2) boxplot(c(rnorm(10), 10), horizontal=TRUE, main="Test", las=2, cex.axis=1) This is from the following line in bxp()

Just change the separator: data(Titanic) Titanic.df <- as.data.frame(Titanic) boxplot(Freq~Class*Sex, Titanic.df, cex.axis=.6, sep="\n") See attached .png. ---------------------------------------- David L Carlson Department of Anthropology Texas A&M University College Station, TX 77843-4352 -----Original Message----- From: R-help [mailto:r-help-bounces at r-project.org] On

What is mystifying is that the issue was not present in previous versions, = so appropriate code already existed. However, I agree that there seem to be a couple of additional issues that = I had missed. =20 I am perfectly happy to look at this again myself, though, and provide = extended code; would that help? S > This retains the current defaults for xlim with at unspecified but = allows