similar to: error in lm

Hi, I encountered a problem when I am trying to write my own function which contains another function. To simplify a problem, I tried the following simplified function, hope someone can idenfity the problem for me. I have a simple data frame called "testdata" as following: >

I am trying to replicate the first example from stepAIC from the MASS package with my own dataset but am running into error. If someone can point where I have gone wrong, I would appreciate it very much. Here is an example : set.seed(1) df <- data.frame( x1=rnorm(1000), x2=rnorm(1000), x3=rnorm(1000) ) df$y <- 0.5*df$x1 + rnorm(1000, mean=8, sd=0.5) # pairs(df); head(df) lo <-

I would like test AICc as a criteria for model selection for a glm using stepAIC() from MASS package. Based on various information available in WEB, stepAIC() use extractAIC() to get the criteria used for model selection. I have created a new extractAIC() function (and extractAIC.glm() and extractAIC.lm() ones) that use a new parameter criteria that can be AIC, BIC or AICc. It works as

I can use stepAIC on an lme object in 1.6.2, but I get the following error if I try to do the same in 1.7.0: Error in lme(fixed = resp ~ cov1 + cov2, data = a, random = structure(list( : unused argument(s) (formula ...) Does anybody know why? Here's an example: library(nlme) library(MASS) a <- data.frame( resp=rnorm(250), cov1=rnorm(250), cov2=rnorm(250),

Hi, I need to construct a formula programaticly, and pass it to a function such as the linear mixed model lme. The help says it requires "a two-sided linear formula object describing the fixed-effects part of the model" but I do not know how to create this formula. I have tried various things using formula(x, ...), as.formula(object, env = parent.frame()) and as.Formula(x, ...)

I'm having a bit of difficulty using the stepwise model-building tools in a glm context. Here, for example is one problem I have had using add1, where the abbreviation "." does not work as I expected it to do. I someone could point me towards some examples involving the interactive building of glm models I would be grateful. The data set that I am using is the

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10785 Summary: [PATCH] Add a flag to use numeric sort Product: rsync Version: 3.1.1 Platform: All OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P5 Component: core AssignedTo: wayned at samba.org ReportedBy: rom at rom1v.com

Should the F statistic be the same when using add1() on models created by lm and glm(family=gaussian)? They are in the single-degree-of-freedom case but not in the multiple-degree-of-freedom case. MASS:addterm shows the same discrepancy. It looks like the deviance (==residual sum of squares) gets divided by the number of degrees of freedom for the term twice in add1.glm. Using anova() on the

The birth weight example from ?stepAIC in package MASS runs well as indeed it should. However when I change stepAIC() calls to step() calls I get warning messages that I don't understand, although the output is similar. Warning messages: 1: In model.response(m, "numeric") : using type="numeric" with a factor response will be ignored (and three more the same.) Checked

I have a lm in R in the form model <- lm( Z ~ A*B*C*D,data=mydata) I want to run the model and include all interactions expect the 4 way (A:B:C:D) is there an easy way of doing this? I then want to step down the model eliminating the non-significant terms I understand step() does this but how would I do it by hand? -- View this message in context:

Hi, Suppose I have: # Fit a base model d1.ph <- coxph(Surv(start, stop, event)~ ejec + diavol + score + smoking + beta + surg.done, data = data.frame(foo)) summary(update(d1.ph, . ~ . + td1)) summary(update(d1.ph, . ~ . + td2)) As I have many columns in my data frame, foo, called td's. e.g. td1, td2, td3, .... And I'd like to

Dear all, I have been trying to investigate the behaviour of different weights in weighted regression for a dataset with lots of missing data. As a start I simulated some data using the following: library(MASS) N <- 200 sigma <- matrix(c(1, .5, .5, 1), nrow = 2) sim.set <- as.data.frame(mvrnorm(N, c(0, 0), sigma)) colnames(sim.set) <- c('x1', 'x2') # x1 & x2 are

Hi, I have sent this message to this list the July, 7th. It was about a problem in MASS package. Until now there is no change in the devel version. As the problem occurs in a package and not in the R-core, I don't know if the message should have been sent here. Anyway, I have added a copy to Pr Ripley. I hope it could have been fixed. Sincerely Marc Le 09/07/2017 ? 16:05, Marc Girondot via

Hello, I'm currently dealing with a rather strange problem when using the function "stepAIC" ("MASS" package). The setting is the following: From model learning data sets ("learndata"), I want to be able to build prediction functions (in order to save them in a file for further use). This is done by the function "pred.function" (see below). Therein,

R gurus, I'm working on data analysis for a small project. My response variable is total vines per tree (median = 0, mean = 1.65, min = 0, max = 24). My predictors are two categorical variables (four sites and four species) and one continuous (tree diameter at breast height (DBH)). The main question I'm attempting to answer is whether or not the species identity of a tree has

Dear R Help, I have noticed some inconsistent behaviour of add1 and drop1 with a weighted linear model, which affects the interpretation of the results. I have these data to fit with a linear model, I want to weight them by the relative size of the geographical areas they represent. _________________________________________________________________________________________ > example

Folks, I'm using stepAIC(MASS) to do some automated, exploratory, model selection for binomial and Poisson glm models in R 1.3. Because I wanted to experiment with the small-sample correction AICc, I dug around in the code for the functions glm.fit stepAIC dropterm.glm addterm.glm extractAIC.glm and came across something I just don't understand. stepAIC() passes dropterm.glm() a

Hello Tyler, I want to bring to your attention the following document: "What happens if you omit the main effect in a regression model with an interaction?" (https://stats.idre.ucla.edu/stata/faq/what-happens-if-you-omit-the-main-effect-in-a-regression-model-with-an-interaction). This gives a useful review of the problem. Your example is Case 2: a continuous and a categorical regressor.

On 12/4/2018 10:40 AM, Joan Moreau via dovecot wrote: > > In the Wiki, ( https://wiki.dovecot.org/Plugins/FTS/Solr ), it would > nice to stipulate to the reader? to type the command : > > sudo -u solr /opt/solr/bin/solr create -c dovecot # to create the > dovecot instance > > before updating the schema.xml . > > Also,? schema.xml is in

Dear all, I have tried to modify the code of MASS:::stepAIC.default(), dropterm() and addterm() to use AICc instead of AIC for model selection. The code is appended below. Somehow the calculations are still not correct and I would be grateful if anyone could have a look at what might be wrong with this code... Here is a working example: ## require(nlme) model1=lme(distance ~ age + Sex, data =