similar to: Use of geometric mean for geochemical concentrations

A statistical question, not specific to R. I'm asking for a pointer for a source of definitive descriptions of what types of data are best summarized by the arithmetic, geometric, and harmonic means. As an aquatic ecologist I see regulators apply the geometric mean to geochemical concentrations rather than using the arithmetic mean. I want to know whether the geometric mean of a set of

On Mon, 22 Jan 2024, Rich Shepard wrote: > As an aquatic ecologist I see regulators apply the geometric mean to > geochemical concentrations rather than using the arithmetic mean. I want to > know whether the geometric mean of a set of chemical concentrations (e.g., > in mg/L) is an appropriate representation of the expected value. If not, I > want to explain this to non-technical

better posted on r-sig-ecology? -- or maybe even stack exchange? Cheers, Bert On Mon, Jan 22, 2024 at 7:45?AM Rich Shepard <rshepard at appl-ecosys.com> wrote: > A statistical question, not specific to R. > > I'm asking for a pointer for a source of definitive descriptions of what > types of data are best summarized by the arithmetic, geometric, and > harmonic >

On Mon, 22 Jan 2024, Bert Gunter wrote: > better posted on r-sig-ecology? -- or maybe even stack exchange? Bert, Okay. Regards, Rich

I think https://stats.stackexchange.com would be best: r-sig-ecology is pretty quiet these days On 2024-01-22 11:05 a.m., Rich Shepard wrote: > On Mon, 22 Jan 2024, Bert Gunter wrote: > >> better posted on r-sig-ecology? -- or maybe even stack exchange? > > Bert, > > Okay. > > Regards, > > Rich > > ______________________________________________

On Mon, 22 Jan 2024, Martin Maechler wrote: > I think it is a good question, not really only about geo-chemistry, but > about statistics in applied sciences (and engineering for that matter). > John W Tukey (and several other of the grands of the time) had the log > transform among the "First aid transformations": > > If the data for a continuous variable must all be

>>>>> Rich Shepard >>>>> on Mon, 22 Jan 2024 07:45:31 -0800 (PST) writes: > A statistical question, not specific to R. I'm asking for > a pointer for a source of definitive descriptions of what > types of data are best summarized by the arithmetic, > geometric, and harmonic means. In spite of off-topic: I think it is a good

Ah.... LOD's, typically LLOD's ("lower limits of detection"). Disclaimer: I am *NOT* in any sense an expert on such matters. What follows are just some comments based on my personal experience. Please filter accordingly. Also, while I kept it on list as Martin suggested it might be useful to do so, most folks probably can safely ignore the rant that follows as off topic and not

Still OT... but here is my own (I think previously mentioned here) rant on people thrashing about with log transformation and an all-too-common kludge to deal with zeros mixed among small numbers... https://gist.github.com/jdnewmil/99301a88de702ad2fcbaef33326b08b4 OP perhaps posting a link here to your question posed wherever you end up with it will help shorten this thread. On January 22, 2024

Hi all I hope you might help me with some aspects of producing a graph in lattice. There are three things I have struggling with and that is: 1. to separate the horizontal box rows from each other; 2. to change the colour of the horizontal and vertical strips to white; and 3. to place the axes labels on the left y axes and on the bottom x axes. I would really appreciate some help. I have put the

?.S3methods f <- function()(2) > length(.S3methods(f)) [1] 0 > length(.S3methods(print)) [1] 206 There may be better ways, but this is what came to my mind. -- Bert On Wed, Mar 8, 2023 at 11:09?AM Leonard Mada via R-help < r-help at r-project.org> wrote: > Dear R-Users, > > I want to change the args() function to return by default the arguments > of the default

Hi all I was wondering if it is possible to get rid of the horizontal strips and produce each barchart with a left y axes and lower x axes only. Also can you specify an exact size of graph ie 88mm wide with a font size of 'x'. library(lattice) library(latticeExtra) n=as.factor(c(1:5,1:5))

Dear R-Users, I want to change the args() function to return by default the arguments of the default generic function: args = function(name, default = TRUE) { ?? ?# TODO: && is.function.generic(); ?? ?if(default) { ?? ???? fn = match.call()[[2]]; ?? ???? fn = paste0(as.character(fn), ".default"); ?? ???? name = fn; ?? ?} ?? ?.Internal(args(name)); } Is there a nice way

Dear R Users, Are there any tools to extract the function names called by reverse-dependencies? I would like to group these functions using clustering methods based on the co-occurrence in the reverse-dependencies. Utility: It may be possible to split complex packages into modules with fewer reverse-dependencies. Package pkgdepR may offer some of the functionality; but I did not have time to

Hello R guru's I am a newbie to R, In my research work I usually generate a lot of ELISA data in form of absorbance values. I ususally use Excel to calculate the concentrations of unknown, but it is too tedious and manual especially when I have 100's of files to process. I would appreciate some help in creating a R script to do this with minimal manual input. s A1-G1 and A2-G2 are

On 2024-09-05 4:23 p.m., Leo Mada via R-help wrote: > Dear R Users, > > Is this desired behaviour? > I presume it's a bug. > > atan(1i) > # 0+Infi > > tan(atan(1i)) > # 0+1i > > atan(1i) / 5 > # NaN+Infi There's no need to involve atan() and tan() in this: > (0+Inf*1i)/5 [1] NaN+Infi Why do you think this is a bug? Duncan Murdoch

atan(1i) -> 0 + Inf i complex(1/5) -> 0.2 + 0i atan(1i) -> (0 + Inf i) * (0.2 + 0i) -> 0*0.2 + 0*0i + Inf i * 0.2 + Inf i * 0i infinity times zero is undefined -> 0 + 0i + Inf i + NaN * i^2 -> 0 + 0i + Inf i - NaN -> NaN + Inf i I am not sure how complex arithmetic could arrive at another answer. I advise against messing with infinities... use atan2() if you don't

Dear Bert, These behave like real divisions/multiplications: complex(re=Inf, im = Inf) * 5 # Inf+Infi complex(re=-Inf, im = Inf) * 5 # -Inf+Infi The real division / multiplication should be faster and also is well behaved. I was expecting R to do the real division/multiplication on a complex number. Which R actually does for these very particular cases; but not when only Im(x) is Inf.

> complex(real = 0, imaginary = Inf) [1] 0+Infi > Inf*1i [1] NaN+Infi >> complex(real = 0, imaginary = Inf)/5 [1] NaN+Infi See the Note in ?complex for the explanation, I think. Duncan can correct if I'm wrong. -- Bert On Thu, Sep 5, 2024 at 3:20?PM Leo Mada <leo.mada at syonic.eu> wrote: > Dear Bert, > > These behave like real divisions/multiplications: >

? Sat, 1 Jun 2024 16:16:23 +0000 Leo Mada via R-help <r-help at r-project.org> ?????: > When highlighting pdf-documents with Microsoft Edge, the bounding box > is sometimes misplaced, and quite ugly so. It also lacks the ability > to draw lines or arrows. > > On the other hand, I did not get used to Acrobat Reader: it usually > involves much more effort to add specific