similar to: colineraity among categorical variables (multinom)

Dear R users, I have three questions measuring close relationships. The questions are same and the respondents put the answer in order. I'd like to examine the pattern of answers and visualize it. For example q1 (A,B,C,D,E) and q2 and q3 are the same. If the respondents selects A B C (so BCA or BAC or CBA or CAB), I'd like to construct frequency table for ABC and other combinations for

Dear R users, I have a reproducible data and try to create new variable "clo" is 1 if know variable is equal to "very well" or "fairly well" and getalong is 4 or 5 otherwise it is 0. rep_data<- read.table(header=TRUE, text=" id1 id2 know getalong 100000016_a1 100000016_a2 very well 4 100000035_a1 100000035_a2 fairly

I want to get the logLik to calculate McFadden.R2 ,ML.R2 and Cragg.Uhler.R2, but the value from multinom does not have logLik.So my quetion is : is logLik meaningful to multinomial logistic model from multinom?If it does, how can I get it? Thank you! ps: I konw VGAM has function to get the multinomial logistic model with logLik, but I prefer use the function from "official" R

Hi, I found that using different contrasts (e.g. contr.helmert vs. contr.treatment) will generate different fitted probabilities from multinomial logistic regression using multinom(); while the fitted probabilities from binary logistic regression seem to be the same. Why is that? and for multinomial logisitc regression, what contrast should be used? I guess it's helmert? here is an example

Dear All: I am interested in multinomial logit models (function multinon, library nnet) but I'm having troubles in choose whether to define the predictors as factors or not. I had posted earlier this example (thanks for the reply ronggui): worms<- data.frame(year= rep(2000:2004, c(3,3,3,3,3)),age=rep(1:3,5),

Dear all, I have found some difference of the results between multinom() function in R and multinomial logistic regression in SPSS software. The input data, model and parameters are below: choles <- c(94, 158, 133, 164, 162, 182, 140, 157, 146, 182); sbp <- c(105, 121, 128, 149, 132, 103, 97, 128, 114, 129); case <- c(1, 3, 3, 2, 1, 2, 3, 1, 2, 2); result <- multinom(case ~ choles

Running a binary logit model on the data df <- data.frame(y=sample(letters[1:3], 100, repl=T), x=rnorm(100)) reveals some residual deviance: summary(glm(y ~ ., data=df, family=binomial("logit"))) However, running a multinomial model on that data (multinom, nnet) reveals a residual deviance: summary(multinom(y ~ ., data=df)) On page 203, the MASS book says that "here the

Dear R users, I'm using a multinomial LOGIT model to analyse choice behaviour of consumers (as part of my masters thesis research). Using the R documentation and search on the R website I have a working script now. Parameters are estimated and I can access them via coefficients(multinom.out). In order to see if the parameters are significant I like to access the standard errors in the

Best R Help, I like to estimate a Multinomial Logit Model with 10 Classes. The problem is that the number of observations differs a lot over the 10 classes: Class | num. Observations A | 373 B | 631 C | 171 D | 700 E | 87 F | 249 G | 138 H | 133 I | 162 J | 407 Total: 3051 Where my data looks like: x1 x2 x3 x4 Class 1 1,02 2 1 A 2 7,2 1 5 B 3 4,2 1 4 H 1 4,1 1 8 F 2 2,4 3 7 D 1 1,2 0 4 J 2 0,9

Hi all, I'm working on a multinomial (or "polytomous") logistic regression using R and have made great progress using multinom() from the nnet library. My response variable has three categories, and there are two different possible predictors. I'd like to use the likelihoods of certain models (ie, saturated, fitteds, and null) to calculate Nagelkerke R-squared values for

Hi, I am trying to specify a multinomial logit model using the multinom function from the nnet package. Now I add another independent variable and it halves the AIC as given by summary(multinom()). But when I call Anova(multinom()) from the car package, it tells me that this added variable is insignificant (Pr(>Chisq)=0.39). Thus, the improved AIC suggests to keep the variable but the Anova

Hi: I'm working with multinomial models with library nnet, and I'm trying to get the explained deviance (pseudo R^2) of my models. I am assuming that: pseudo R^2= 1 - dev(model) / dev (null) where dev(model) is the deviance for the fitted model and dev(null) is the deviance for the null model (with the intercept only). library(nnet) full.model<- multinom(cbind(factor1,

Dear all, I'm fitting a multinom function to my dataset (multinom(outcome~age+K+D)) and I need to present my results on a poster. Does someone know a nice way of doing that? I think I saw in an archive that you cannot plot a multinom.object, is it true? Thank you by advance for your help, Cheers Camille

Dear All. I have the following table that I want to analyze using multinom function freq segments sample 4271 Seg1 tumour 4311 Seg2 tumour 3515 Seg1 normal 3561 Seg2 normal I want to compare model with both factors to the one where only sample is present. model1=multinom(freq~segments+sample,data=table) model2=multinom(freq~ sample,data=table)

Is there a colinearty function implemented in R? I have tried help.search("colinearity") and help.search("collinearity") and have searched for "colinearity" and "collinearity" on http://www.rpad.org/Rpad/Rpad-refcard.pdf but with no success. Many thanks in advance, Peter Lauren.

Hi! I'm having some issues on both conceptual and technical levels for selecting the right combination of variables for this model I'm working on. The basic, all inclusive form looks like lm(mic ~ B * D * S * U * V * ICU) Where mic, U, V, and ICU are numeric values and B D and S are factors with about 16, 16 and 2 levels respectively. In short, there's a ton of actual explanatory

Dear R-helpers, I need to compute probabilties of multinomial observations, eg by doing the following: y=sample(1:3,15,1) prob=matrix(runif(45),15) prob=prob/rowSums(prob) diag(prob[,y]) However, my question is whether this is the most efficient way to do this. In the call prob[,y] a whole matrix is computed which seems a bit of a waste. Is there maybe a vectorized version of dmultinom which

Hello folks, Let me first apologize: I'm not a professional nor a mathematician, just an ordinary guy, fooling around with the excellent R-package. I know the basic principles behind statistics, but haven't read anything more advanced than the ordinary first probability and statistics courses. Enough disclaimers? Good! I was examining the multinom-function (in the nnet-package) the other

I'm sorry to all those who are tired of seeing my email appear in need of help. But, I've never coded in any program before, so this has been a difficult process for me. Is there a simple function to test for colinearity in R? I'm running a logistic regression and a linear regression. Thanks for the help! [[alternative HTML version deleted]]

Hi group: I have a data set, which has severe colinearity problem. While running linear regression in R and SPSS, I got different models. I am wondering if somebody knows how to make the two software output the same results. (I guess the way R and SPSS handling singularity is different, which leads to different models.) Thanks. [[alternative HTML version deleted]]