similar to: Bug in all.equal() or in the plm package

Hello, I am trying to run a fixed effects panel regression on data containing 5 columns and 1,494 rows. I read the data in as follows: >drugsXX<-read.csv(file="C:\\Folder\\vX.X\\Drugs\\drugsXX_panel.csv", head=TRUE, sep=",") Verified it read in correctly and had a good data.frame: >dim(drugsXX) [1] 1494 5 >drugs XX produce expected data with correct column

Dear "plm"-Package insiders, [I posted the following observation is April already but unfortunately I am not aware of any answers. With the hope that someone found an answer in the mean time, I ask again:] I realized the following difficulty with the summary.plm function (demonstrated with the example from the ?plm documentation). library(plm) data("Produc",

Hi all, I have estimated a random panel model using plm function. I have a question about the vector of resduals obtained with the object $residuals. example: data("Produc", package = "plm") zz <- plm(log(gsp) ~ log(pcap) + log(pc) + log(emp) + unemp, model="random", data = Produc, index = c("state","year")) res<-zz$residuals #

Hi all, what indicates the parameter theta in the summary of a random effect panel model estimated with the plm function? example: data("Produc", package = "plm") zz <- plm(log(gsp) ~ log(pcap) + log(pc) + log(emp) + unemp, model="random", data = Produc, index = c("state","year")) summary(zz) Effects: var std.dev

Dear all, I am trying to export my fixed effect results to Latex. I am using the plm package with the summary function. However, it does not look like apsrtable, stargazer, or any other package can accompany using the plm package. I am interested in a classic table with the coefficient in one row followed by the standard error in paranthesis in the next row and stars by the coefficient to show

Hello, Apologies in advance if this is a stupid question. I am running R on Ubuntu 9. R version 2.9.2 (2009-08-24) I am trying to work with plm. I think the library is installed, as I can do > library(plm) Loading required package: kinship Loading required package: survival Loading required package: splines Loading required package: nlme Loading required package: lattice [1] "kinship

Dear plm Package users, I use the plm package a lot but I have not updated it for some times. Now I realized the following difficulty with the summary.plm function (demonstrated with the example from the ?plm documentation). library(plm) data("Produc", package="Ecdat") estimation_method<-"within" estimation_effect<-"individual" zz

In the rockchalk package, I want to provide functions for regression objects that are "well behaved." If an object responds to the methods that lm or glm objects can handle, like coef(), nobs(), and summary(), I want to be able to handle the same thing. It is more difficult than expected to ask a given fitted model object "do you respond to these functions: coef(), nobs(),

Hello, Apologies in advance if this is a stupid question. I am running R on Ubuntu 9. R version 2.9.2 (2009-08-24) I am trying to work with plm. I think the library is installed, as I can do > library(plm) Loading required package: kinship Loading required package: survival Loading required package: splines Loading required package: nlme Loading required package: lattice [1] "kinship

Hello, I am trying to conduct a Hausman test to choose between FE estimators and RE estimators. When I try to run: library(plm) fixed <- plm(ROS ~ DiffClosenessC +ZZiele + AggSK + nRedundantStrecken + Degree + KantenGew + BetweennessC + SitzKappazitaet, data=Panel,index=c("id","time"),model="within") summary(fixed) fixef(fixed) random <-plm(ROS ~

When using the PLM package (version 1.2-8), I encounter the probem that calling the FGLS estimator evokes strange behavior, when choosing the "random" effects model. After calling the PGGLS function to estimate FGLS, PLM gives me a warning, stating that the "random" model has been replaced with the "pooling" model. I would, however, really like to estimate the random

Dear R-helpers, I have a very simple question and I really hope that someone could help me I would like to estimate a simple fixed effect regression model with clustered standard errors by individuals. For those using Stata, the counterpart would be xtreg with the "fe" option, or areg with the "absorb" option and in both case the clustering is achieved with "vce(cluster

Hi, How could I see the source code of functions in an R package? If we type ?function_name , we will see documentations of the function_name. If we type function_name, is what returns just the source code? Could we just save it in an .R file and modify as we want? However, it seems that sometimes the source code is hidden (or stored elsewhere?) As an example, could we see the source

Hi all, I a semi-beginner with R and I am working with the plm package to examine a longitudinal dataset. Each individual in this dataset has a longitudinal weight for the probability that he or she remains in the sample. Unfortunately, I have not found an argument to use weights in the plm function? I tried ?weights=? like in standard lm or in nlme or lm4 but it does not work. I asked the

Thanks a lot for the quick answerd I received and that helped me to solve my first (simple) problem with the plm package. Unfortunatley, here's another one: I do not know why, but I'm unable to estimate a simple model in the form y ~ 1 + x When I try > zz <- plm(y ~ 1 + x , data=mydata) I obtain Errore in X.m[, coef.within, drop = F] : numero di dimensioni errato which means

Hello list, I'm following the paper (http://www.jstatsoft.org/v27/i02/paper) on how to use "plm" to run panel regressions, and am having trouble with what I believe should be something very basic. When I run the command (p.9 in the paper): R> dynformula(emp~wage+capital,log=list(capital=FALSE,TRUE),lag=list(emp=2,c(2,3)),diff=list(FALSE,capital=TRUE)) I see: emp ~ wage +

Hello list, I'm following the paper (http://www.jstatsoft.org/v27/i02/paper) on how to use "plm" to run panel regressions, and am having trouble with what I believe should be something very basic. When I run the command (p.9 in the paper): R> dynformula(emp~wage+capital,log=list(capital=FALSE,TRUE),lag=list(emp=2,c(2,3)),diff=list(FALSE,capital=TRUE)) I see: emp ~ wage +

Hello again Max. A correction to my response from yesterday. Things were better than they seemed. I thought it over, checked Arellano's panel book and Driscoll and Kraay (Rev. Econ. Stud. 1998) and finally realized that vcovSCC does what you want: in fact, despite being born primarily for dealing with cross-sectional correlation, 'SCC' standard errors are robust to "both

> On Mar 31, 2016, at 1:00 PM, Paul Johnson <pauljohn32 at gmail.com> wrote: > > In the rockchalk package, I want to provide functions for regression > objects that are "well behaved." If an object responds to the methods > that lm or glm objects can handle, like coef(), nobs(), and summary(), > I want to be able to handle the same thing. > > It is more

Hi there everyone, I have the following model (this is naturally a simplified version just for showing my problem, in case you're wondering this is a translog cost function with the associated cost share equations): C ~ á + â1 log X + â2 log Y + ã1 log Z + ã2 log XX C1 ~ â1 + â2 log YY + ã1 log ZZ Then I have some restrictions on the coefficients, namely that the sum of â equal 1 and the