similar to: Applying lm() to weighted cell.means

Dear R users, I'm trying to fit a simple random intercept model with a fixed intercept. Suppose I want to assign a weight w_i to the i-th contribute to the log-likelihood, i.e. w_i * logLik_i where logLik_i is the log-likelihood for the i-th subject. I want to maximize the likelihood for N subjects Sum_i {w_i * logLik_i} Here is a simple example to reproduce

dear list, my question concerns the use of `eval' in defining the model formula for `nls' (version 2.6.2.). consider the following simple example, where the same model and data are used to perform unweighted and weighted fits. I intentionally used very uneven weights to guarantee large differences in the results #================================CUT=========================== ln

2 days ago I asked this on r-help, but no luck... since this is actually a programming question, I post it here again: my question concerns the use of `eval' in defining the model formula for `nls' when performing weighted fits. (I use version 2.6.2., but according to NEWS there were no changes to `nls' in 2.7.0, so the problem is still present). in this scenario their

Hi there, I'm trying to fit a growth curve to some data and need to use a weighted least squares estimator to account for heteroscedasticity in the data. A weights argument is available in nls that would appear to be appropriate for this purpose, but it is listed as 'not yet implemented'. Is there another package which could implement this procedure? Regards, Robert Brown

Dear all, I would like to draw a dendrogram and mark some parts/branches (by using "segments") including their labels. If I draw it without specifying the length of x axix, I am able to do that (as in My dendrogram 1 of the following codes). However, if I want to specify the x axix, I am not able to draw marking line (by using "segments") including labels (as in My dendrogram

I am more than 'a little disappointed' that you expect a detailed explanation of the problems with your 'bug' report, especially as you did not provide any explanation yourself as to your reasoning (nor did you provide any credentials nor references). Note that 1) Your report did not make clear that this was only relevant to prediction intervals, which are not commonly used.

libswfdec/swfdec_as_strings.c | 2 libswfdec/swfdec_text_field.c | 66 +++++++++++++++++++++++----- libswfdec/swfdec_text_field_movie.c | 5 +- libswfdec/swfdec_text_field_movie_as.c | 77 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--- 4 files changed, 132 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-) New commits: commit a165608df6751cf46561b570db61ff309f5b7244 Author: Pekka Lampila

Using the PPC frsqrte and fres instructions, I got the percentage time take in the smoothing code in _vp_compute_mask() down from 13.64% to 1.88% of the running time. In my local copy of Vorbis I have a fast_math.[hc] in vorbis/lib and have a _fast_sqrt() inline in fast_math.h. If anyone else wants to try it out, it follows. I can currently encode my test file (the first 15 seconds of

R 0.63.3 (any platform) library(lqs) example(lqs) gives Warning in (y - z$residuals) + offset : longer object length is not a multiple of shorter object length repeatedly. The problem is in lm.wfit, which removes cases with zero weights, but does not adjust the offset. The fix is z$fitted.values <- (y - z$residuals) z$weights <- w if (zero.weights) {

This fixes some unwanted scaling when the output is multisampled. Also increases nvc0 maximum supported texture size to be able to work with a 32k texture. Signed-off-by: Ilia Mirkin <imirkin at alum.mit.edu> Cc: "10.0 10.1" <mesa-stable at lists.freedesktop.org> --- Ran the EXT_framebuffer_multisample tests, they improve a lot. The remaining failures are probably due to

libswfdec/swfdec_movie.c | 91 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------ libswfdec/swfdec_movie.h | 7 ++ libswfdec/swfdec_player.c | 57 ++++++++++++++++------ libswfdec/swfdec_player_internal.h | 12 +++- libswfdec/swfdec_sprite_movie_as.c | 75 +++++++---------------------- vivified/core/vivi_application.c | 37 ++++++--------

I suggest a simple enhancement to segments() and arrows() to facilitate drawing horizontal and vertical segments -- set default values for the second x and y arguments equal to the first set. This is handy, especially when the expressions for coordinates are long. Compare: Segments: < function (x0, y0, x1 = x0, y1 = y0, col = par("fg"), lty = par("lty"), --- > function

Uwe Ligges suggested I post this on R-bugs as a wishlist item with a proposed patch. R considers zero-length arguments to segments() to be an error. I would like R to allow this and to return without an error. It occurs naturally in settings like valid <- c(FALSE, FALSE, FALSE) segments(x0[valid], y0[valid], x1[valid], y1[valid]) For what it may be worth, S-Plus does not consider

I was teaching new R users to make some fun graphs. I had some arrows examples worked up we came across a problem. The arrows function ignores 2nd and following elements of vectors given as code an angle. Would you please consider 1) allowing vectors for code and angle, or 2) returning an error or warning when user mistakenly supplies a vector for those parameters? When code like this is

arrows() seems to hang when either x or y scale of the plot is logarithmic and the arrows requested go beyond the plot (by more than a certain amount). I didn't go into C code to find it, but here's a function that exercises the bug a bit ... arrow.bug2 <- function(y0=1,y1=10,log="y") { plot(c(0.1,1),c(1,10),log=log) arrows(x0=0.5, y0=y0, x1=0.5,

libswfdec/swfdec_text_field.c | 288 ---------------------------------- libswfdec/swfdec_text_field.h | 14 - libswfdec/swfdec_text_field_movie.c | 297 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 3 files changed, 291 insertions(+), 308 deletions(-) New commits: commit 2e79c953066b7f6857e88e7efaaed4d8846e9609 Author: Pekka Lampila <pekka.lampila at iki.fi> Date: Wed Oct 17

Dear Sir or Madam: I am Shaojuan Liao, the 3rd year Ph.D. student from Econ Department, Virginia Tech. I don't know whether it is appropriate to ask you questions on the command pgmm. But I don't know how to deal with the case where all X are exogenous and all T time periods' X can be used as the instrument. Problem 1: I know when X are predetermined, such as Z=[y1,X1,X2, 0,

Plotting vector fields as we know it from Wolfram Mathematica's PlotVectorField[{f1(x1), f2(x2)}, {x1, min, max}, {x2, ymin, ymax}, PlotPoints -> ...] ### FUNCTION DEFINITION #! Outer product with vector function ### # expand.outer joins functionality of "expand.grid" and "outer", so that # a vector function can be applied, values of which are then stored in

Hello dear members of R-help and R-core mailing list, I am not sure if this request is a "ticket" that should be filled somewhere outside the mailing list. If so, I apologize for not doing and would like to know where I should have filled it. And to the subject matter: I would like to use a command like this: plot(c(1,8), 1:2, type="n") polygon(1:7, c(2,1,2,NA,2,1,2),

Hello dear members of R-help and R-core mailing list, I am not sure if this request is a "ticket" that should be filled somewhere outside the mailing list. If so, I apologize for not doing and would like to know where I should have filled it. And to the subject matter: I would like to use a command like this: plot(c(1,8), 1:2, type="n") polygon(1:7, c(2,1,2,NA,2,1,2),