similar to: nlm continued

I've been working on a new package and I have a few questions regarding the behaviour of the nlm function. I've been (for better or worse) using the nlm function to fit a linear model without suppling the hessian or gradient attributes in the objective function. I'm curious as to why the nlm requires 31 iterations (for the linear model), and then it doesn't work when I try to add

Hello: Below is a toy logistic regression problem. When I wrote my own code, Newton-Raphson converged in three iterations using both the gradient and the Hessian and the starting values given below. But I can't get nlm() to work! I would much appreciate any help. > x [1] 10.2 7.7 5.1 3.8 2.6 > y [1] 9 8 3 2 1 > n [1] 10 9 6 8 10 derfs4=function(b,x,y,n) {

>>>>> "DougB" == Douglas Bates <bates@stat.wisc.edu> writes: DougB> ....... DougB> ....... { time comparisons in testing lme(..) for R } DougB> ....... DougB> This can be expected to run faster when a version of nlm that accepts DougB> gradients and Hessians is available. --- Doug, do I understand properly that it won't

In the course of revising a paper I have had occasion to attempt to maximize a rather complicated log likelihood using the function nlm(). This is at the demand of a referee who claims that this will work better than my proposed use of a home- grown implementation of the Levenberg-Marquardt algorithm. I have run into serious hiccups in attempting to apply nlm(). If I provide gradient and

Hello splus-users, I am trying to fit a regression model for an ordered response factor. So I am using the function polr in library(MASS). My data is a matrix of 1665 rows and 63 columns (one of the column is the dependent variable). The code I use is polr(as.ordered(q23p)~.,data=newdatap) but I am getting the following warning message singularity encountered in: nlminb.1(temp, p, liv, lv,

Dear expeRts, first of all I'd like to thank you for the quick help on my last which() problem. Here is another one I could not tackle: I have data on an absorption measurement which I want to fit with an voigt profile: fn.1 <- function(p){ for (i1 in ilong){ ff <- f[i1] ex[i1] <- exp(S*n*L*voigt(u,v,ff,p[1],p[2],p[3])[[1]]) } sum((t-ex)^2) } out <-

Admittedly I am using an old version 1.7.1, but can anyone tell if this is or was a problem. I can only get nlm (nonlinear minimization) to adjust the first three components of function variable. No gradient or hessian is supplied. E.G.; fnoise function(y) { y[5]/(y[4]*sp2) * exp(-((x[,3]-y[1]-y[2]*x[,1]-y[3] *x[,2])/y[4])^2/2) + (1-y[5])/(y[9]*sp2) * exp(-((x[,3]-y[6]-y[7]*x[,1]-y[8]

Dear R list members, Since today seems to be the day for optimization questions, I have one that has been puzzling me: I've been doing some work on sem, my structural-equation modelling package. The models that the sem function in this package fits are essentially parametrizations of the multinormal distribution. The function uses optim and nlm sequentially to maximize a multinormal

GENERAL REFERENCE ON NONLINEAR OPTIMIZATION? What are your favorite references on nonlinear optimization? I like Bates and Watts (1988) Nonlinear Regression Analysis and Its Applications (Wiley), especially for its key insights regarding parameter effects vs. intrinsic curvature. Before I spent time and money on several of the refences cited on the help pages for "optim",

Hello, I have been using R to fit my data using non-linear least squares. I have used the optimize routine to minimize the sum of squared errors (using Nealder Meade optimization routine), but couldn't get the non-linear model in R to converge to the estimates acheived in a convergent Neadler Meade routine. It tells me about problems with the gradient. I was wondering if there is any way

Dear all, I have found a bug in nlm() and would like to submit a report on this. Since nlm() is in the stats-package, which is maintained by the R Core team, bug reports should be submitted to R's Bugzilla. However, I'm not a member of Bugzilla. Could anyone be so kind to add me to R's Bugzilla members or let me know to whom I should send the bug report? Thank you in advance. Kind

At present the documentation for nlm refers the reader to Dennis and Schnabel for details on the algorithms. It also states that the function is liable to change. Can anyone tell me if the current version of nlm uses only function values or if it can use gradients and Hessians when they are available? I would like to get an idea of how difficult it would be to port the development versions of

This message is in MIME format. The first part should be readable text, while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools. --1660387551-1458482416-1249639718=:2997 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII; FORMAT=flowed Content-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0908071039211.2997 at parser.ilovebacon.org> Hello, There appears to be a bug in the nlm function, which I

Out of curiosity, I have tried, without success, to use the new facility in nlm to specify the gradient and hessian. (It is many years since I had a problem simple enough to make analytic derivation of these worthwhile.) The help now says that the function must have attributes with these names but gives no indication as to what should be in the attributes. The online example and demo do not use

Dear R-helpers, The function optim implements algorithms that I would like to use. I have function implemented in R, which given the parameters of which minimization is to take place returns a scalar as well as the gradient. Unfortunately optim requires two function _fn_ and _gr_ where fn returns the function value and gr the gradient. Splitting my function in two functions would be easy,

Dear all, There appears to be a bug in how constrOptim handles ... arguments that are suppose to be passed to optim, according to the documentation. This means you can't get the hessian to be returned, for example (so this is a real problem, and not just a question of mistaken documentation). Looking at the code, it appears that a call to the user-defined f includes the ..., when the ...

Hi R-friends, Attached is the SAS XPORT file that I have imported into R using following code library(foreign) mydata<-read.xport("C:\\ctf.xpt") print(mydata) I am trying to maximize logL in order to find Maximum Likelihood Estimate (MLE) of 5 parameters (alpha1, beta1, alpha2, beta2, p) using NLM function in R as follows. # Defining Log likelihood - In the function it is noted as

Hello everyone! I am having some trouble supplying the gradient function to nlm in R for windows version 2.2.1. What follows are the R-code I use: fredcs39<-function(a1,b1,b2,x){return(a1+exp(b1+b2*x))} loglikcs39<-function(theta,len){ value<-sum(mcs39[1:len]*fredcs39(theta[1],theta[2],theta[3],c(8:(7+len))) - pcs39[1:len] * log(fredcs39(theta[1],theta[2],theta[3],c(8:(7+len)))))

Hi R-help! I'm trying to understand how R's nlm function updates its estimate of the Hessian matrix. The Dennis/Schnabel book cited in the references presents a number of different ways to do this, and seems to conclude that the positive-definite secant method (BFGS) works best in practice (p201). However, when I run my code through the optim function with the method as "BFGS",

I have not included the previous postings because they came out very strangely on my mail reader. However, the question concerned the choice of minimizer for the zeroinfl() function, which apparently allows any of the current 6 methods of optim() for this purpose. The original poster wanted to use Newton-Raphson. Newton-Raphson (or just Newton for simplicity) is commonly thought to be the