similar to: SE for all levels (including reference) of a factor atfer a GLM

This is really a statistical issue. What do you think the Intercept term represents? See ?contrasts. Cheers, Bert Bert Gunter "The trouble with having an open mind is that people keep coming along and sticking things into it." -- Opus (aka Berkeley Breathed in his "Bloom County" comic strip ) On Thu, Feb 15, 2018 at 5:27 PM, Marc Girondot via R-help < r-help at

On 16/02/18 15:28, Bert Gunter wrote: > This is really a statistical issue. What do you think the Intercept term > represents? See ?contrasts. > > Cheers, > Bert > > > > Bert Gunter > > "The trouble with having an open mind is that people keep coming along and > sticking things into it." > -- Opus (aka Berkeley Breathed in his "Bloom

Dear Sir/Madam, I apologize for any cross-posting. I got a simple question, which I thought the R list may help me to find an answer. Suppose we have Y_1, Y_2, ., Y_n ~ Poisson (Lambda_i) and Lambda_i ~Gamma(alpha_i, beta_i). Empirical Bayes Estimator for hyper-parameters of the gamma distr, i.e. (alpha_t, beta_t) are needed. y=c(12,5,17,14) n=4 What about a Hierarchal B ayes

To give a short answer to the original question: > On 16 Feb 2018, at 05:02 , Rolf Turner <r.turner at auckland.ac.nz> wrote: > > In order to ascribe unique values to the parameters, one must apply a "constraint". With the "treatment contrasts" the constraint is that > beta_1 = 0. ...and consequently, being a constant, has an s.e. of 0. -- Peter

I have a function myFunction(beta,x) where beta is a vector of coefficients and x is a data frame (think of it as a matrix). I want to optimize the function myFunction() by ONLY changing beta, i.e. x stays constant, with 4 constraints. I have the following code (with a separate source file for the function): rm(list=ls()) source('mySourceFile')

Dear all, I do not seem to grasp how contrasts are set for ordered factors. Perhaps someone can elighten me? When I work with ordered factors, I would often like to be able to reduce the used polynomial to a simpler one (where possible). Thus, I would like to explicetly code the polynomial but ideally, the intial model (thus, the full polynomial) would be identical to one with an ordered factor.

hello. I have a question on the interpretation of a logistic model. is it helpful to exponentiate the coefficients (estimates)? I think I once read something about that, but I cannot remember where. if so, how would be the interpretation of the exp(estimate) ? would there be a change of the interpretation of the ANOVA table (or is the ANOVA table not really helpful at all?). thanks for your

Hi list, Reading the thread "can a class require an other class?" it''s been mentioned that perhaps one way forward for the Puppet language is to phase out the include keyword in favour of parametrised classes. I''m thinking of my Puppet and the several levels of include chaining I use and I''m wondering how on earth that''d be possible. Maybe

I am using both nlminb and optim to get MLEs from a likelihood function I have developed. AFAIK, the model I has not been previously used in this way and so I am struggling a bit to unit test my code since I don't have another data set to compare this kind of estimation to. The likelihood I have is (in tex below) \begin{equation} \label{eqn:marginal} L(\beta) = \prod_{s=1}^N \int

In a classical meta analysis model y_i = X_i * beta_i + e_i, data {y_i} are assumed to be independent effect sizes. However, I'm encountering the following two scenarios: (1) Each source has multiple effect sizes, thus {y_i} are not fully independent with each other. (2) Each source has multiple effect sizes, each of the effect size from a source can be categorized as one of a factor levels

Dear list, I am currently writing up some of my R models in a more formal sense for a paper, and I am having trouble with the notation. Although this isn't really an 'R' question, it should help me to understand a bit better what I am actually doing when fitting my models! Using the analysis of co-variance example from MASS (fourth edition, p 142), what is the correct notation for the

In Venables \& Ripley 3rd edition (p. 231) the proportional odds model is described as: logit(p<=k) = zeta_k + eta but polr apparently thinks there is a minus in front of eta, as is apprent below. Is this a bug og a feature I have overlooked? Here is the naked code for reproduction, below the results. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ --- version

This is the situation I have: All my hosts are the* same OS.* All my host are in the* same puppet environment,* so I cannot use %{environment} I have a module that sets all the *basic* functionality for the OS, resolution, authentication, security, packages, etc I have a module for each application hosted. At the moment all the ''data'' is in Puppet, mostly in parametrised

I use smooth.spline(x, y) in package modreg and I would like to get value of penalized log likelihood and preferable also its two parts. To make clear what I am asking for (and make sure that I am asking for the right thing) I clarify my problem trying to use the same notation as in help(smooth.spline): I want to find the natural cubic spline f(x) such that L(f) = \sum_{k=1}{n} w[k](y[k] -

Dear all, Given a LME model (following the notation of Pinheiro and Bates 2000) y_i = X_i*beta + Z_i*b_i + e_i, is it possible to extract the variance-covariance matrix for the estimated beta_i hat and b_i hat from the lme fitted object? The reason for needing this is because I want to have interval prediction on the predicted values (at level = 0:1). The "predict.lme" seems to

Hi, I got two questions and would really appreciate any help from here. First, is the penalized maximum likelihood estimation(Firth Type Estimation) only fit for binary response (0,1 or TRUE, FALSE)? Can it be applied to multinomial logistic regression? If yes, what's the formula for LL and U(beta_i)? Can someone point me to the right reference? Second, when I used *logistf *on a dataset with

> I am planning in doing in IR, but with target specific-passes (such as X86ExpandAtomicPass) > that just share some of the code This would more normally be done via target hooks in LLVM, though the principle is sound. > But it must be target-dependent as for example on Power a > seq_cst store has a fence before it, while on ARM it has a fence > both before and after it (per

Dear people, A somewhat clueless question follows: I just discovered that the lme function in contrib package nlme for R, while similar to the lme function in Splus, does not use the cluster function option. This difference does not appear to be documented in the V&R `R Complements' file. I have data which is divided into 6 groups The lme model is of the form (simplified from the actual

Dear list, I'm trying to fit a multilevel (mixed-effects) model using the lme function (package nlme) in R 2.4.0. As a mixed-effects newbie I'm neither sure about the modeling nor the correct R syntax. My data is structured as follows: For each subject, a quantity Y is measured at a number (>= 2) of time points. Moreover, at time point 0 ("baseline"), a quantity X is

Hi, Is it possible to redirect passing multi dimensional parameters? I need to send params[:current][:selview] to another action mantaining the same data structure if I try as follows: redirect_to :controller=>"main",:action=>"inquiry",{"current"=>{ "selview"=>params[:current][:selview]}} I receive "syntax error, unexpected