similar to: RFC: a "safe" uniroot() function for future R

Hi, I have tried to use uniroot to solve a value (value a in my function) that gives f=0, and I repeat this process for 10000 times(stimulations). However error occures from the 4625th stimulation - Error in uniroot(f, c(0, 2), maxiter = 1000, tol = 0.001) : f() values at end points not of opposite sign I have also tried interval of (lower=min(U), upper=max(U)) and it won't work as well.

I am calling the uniroot function from inside another function using these lines (last two lines of the function) : d <- uniroot(k, c(.001, 250), tol=.05) return(d$root) The problem is that on occasion there's a problem with the values I'm passing to uniroot. In those instances uniroot stops and sends a message that it can't calculate the root because f.upper * f.lower is greater

Le 18/02/2023 ? 21:44, J C Nash a ?crit?: > I wrote first cut at unirootR for Martin M and he revised and put in > Rmpfr. > > The following extends Ben's example, but adds the unirootR with trace > output. > > c1 <- 4469.822 > c2 <- 572.3413 > f <- function(x) { c1/x - c2/(1-x) }; uniroot(f, c(1e-6, 1)) > uniroot(f, c(1e-6, 1)) > library(Rmpfr) >

Dear friends - occurring in Windows R2.6.2 I am modeling physical chemistry in collaboration with a friend who has preferred working in Excel. I used uniroot, and find a solution to a two buffer problem in acid-base chemistry which I believe is physiologically sensible. Using "goal seek" in Excel my friend found another plausible root, quite close to zero, and a plot of the function

Hi all, This is probably a blindingly obvious question: Why does it matter in the uniroot function whether the f() values at the end points that you supply are of the same sign? For example: f <- function(x,y) {y-x^2+1} #this gives a warning uniroot(f,interval=c(-5,5),y=0) Error in uniroot(f, interval=c(-5, 5), y = 0) : f() values at end points not of opposite sign #this doesn't give a

I wrote first cut at unirootR for Martin M and he revised and put in Rmpfr. The following extends Ben's example, but adds the unirootR with trace output. c1 <- 4469.822 c2 <- 572.3413 f <- function(x) { c1/x - c2/(1-x) }; uniroot(f, c(1e-6, 1)) uniroot(f, c(1e-6, 1)) library(Rmpfr) unirootR(f, c(1e-6, 1), extendInt="no", trace=1) This gives more detail on the iterations,

Dear friends - merry Christmas and thanks a lot for much help during the year! In the example below I fail to understand how the calculated value pH is represented in a simple plot - also included. The calculations are useful in practice and likely to be right in principle but I cannot see how this occurs: why a calculated value of 7.4 known as numeric is not simply plotted as such. It

Dear friends - copy paste missed SID <- c() before the first loop - sorry BW Troels Den 25-12-2017 kl. 19:12 skrev Troels Ring: > > Dear friends - merry Christmas and thanks a lot for much help during > the year! > > In the example below I fail to understand how the calculated value pH > is represented in a simple plot - also included. The calculations are > useful

Hi, I'm trying to calculate the value of the variable, dp, below, in the argument to the integral of dnorm(x-dp) * pnorm(x)^(m-1). This corresponds to the estimate of the sensitivity of an observer in an m-alternative forced choice experiment, given the probability of a correct response, Pc, a Gaussian assumption for the noise and no bias. The function that I wrote below gives me an error:

A recent message on ansari.test() prompted me to play with the examples. This doesn't work for me in R version 2.4.1 R> ansari.test(rnorm(100), rnorm(100, 0, 2), conf.int = TRUE) Error in uniroot(ab, srange, tol = 1e-04, zq = qnorm(alpha/2, lower = FALSE)) : object "ab" not found It looks like there's a small typo in ccia() inside ansari.test.default() in which

Full_Name: Chris Andrews Version: 2.2.1 OS: Windows Submission from: (NULL) (128.205.94.95) The function page for uniroot indicates If the algorithm does not converge in 'maxiter' steps, a warning is printed and the current approximation is returned. I have not been able to get a warning message even when I think I should get one (see code below). Perhaps the bug is in the

I have a strange problem with uniroot() function. Here is the result : > uniroot(th, c(-20, 20)) $root [1] 4.216521e-05 $f.root [1] 16.66423 $iter [1] 27 $estim.prec [1] 6.103516e-05 Pls forgive for not reproducing whole code, here my question is how "f.root" can be 16.66423? As it is finding root of a function, it must be near Zero. Am I missing something? -- View this message

Dear all, I have the following problem with the uniroot function. I want to find roots for the fucntion "Fp2" which is defined as below. Fz <- function(z){0.8*pnorm(z)+p1*pnorm(z-u1)+(0.2-p1)*pnorm(z-u2)} Fp <- function(t){(1-Fz(abs(qnorm(1-(t/2)))))+(Fz(-abs(qnorm(1-(t/2)))))} Fp2 <- function(t) {Fp(t)-0.8*t/alpha} th <- uniroot(Fp2, lower =0, upper =1,

Thanks a lot - formatting the ordinate as ylim=c(4,10) before plotting pH also removed the problem, and options(digits=10) confirmed that pH was not all exactly 7.4 - as I knew. Still I wonder just why R chooses to plot(ATOT,pH) as shown with repeated "7.4" instead of some more detailed representation. Thanks a gain and happy New Year! Troels Den 26-12-2017 kl. 01:03 skrev Bert

In looking at rootfinding for the histoRicalg project (see gitlab.com/nashjc/histoRicalg), I thought I would check how uniroot() solves some problems. The following short example ff <- function(x){ exp(0.5*x) - 2 } ff(2) ff(1) uniroot(ff, 0, 10) uniroot(ff, c(0, 10), trace=1) uniroot(ff, c(0, 10), trace=TRUE) shows that the trace parameter, as described in the Rd file, does not seem to be

Dear friends - I have a function for the charge in a fluid (water) buffered with HEPES and otherwise only containing Na and Cl so that [Na] - [Cl] = SID (strong ion difference) goes from -1 mM to 1 mM. With known SID and total HEPES concentration I can calculate accurately the pH if I know 3 pK values for HEPES by finding the single root with uniroot Now, the problem is that there is some

Despite my years with R, I didn't know about trace(). Thanks. However, my decades in the minimization and root finding game make me like having a trace that gives some info on the operation, the argument and the current function value. I've usually found glitches are a result of things like >= rather than > in tests etc., and knowing what was done is the quickest way to get there.

Hi, I'm using the uniroot function, and would like to detect an error which occurs, for instance, when the values at endpoints are not of opposite signs. For example: uniroot( function(x) x^2+1, lower=1, upper=2 ). I want to say something like: if "error in uniroot(...)" return NA else return uniroot$root Thanks a lot! Asaf -- View this message in context:

On 06/10/2020 11:00 a.m., Sorkin, John wrote: > Colleagues, > I am trying to learn to use uniroot to solve a simple linear equation. I define the function, prove the function and a call to the function works. When I try to use uniroot to solve the equation I get an error message, > Error in yfu n(x,10,20) : object 'x' not found. > > I hope someone can tell we how I can fix

curiosity---given that vector operations are so much faster than scalar operations, would it make sense to make uniroot vectorized? if I read the uniroot docs correctly, uniroot() calls an external C routine which seems to be a scalar function. that must be slow. I am thinking a vectorized version would be useful for an example such as of <- function(x,a) ( log(x)+x+a ) uniroot( of, c(