similar to: colnames from submatrix?

hi all i have a question that about the eigen analysis found in R and in eviews. i used the same data set in the two packages and found different answers. which is incorrect? the data is: aa ( a correlation matrix) 1 0.9801 0.9801 0.9801 0.9801 0.9801 1 0.9801 0.9801 0.9801 0.9801 0.9801 1 0.9801 0.9801 0.9801 0.9801 0.9801 1 0.9801 0.9801 0.9801 0.9801 0.9801 1 now > svd(aa) $d [1] 4.9204

As usual, the R newsgroup set me straight (thanks to Douglas Bates, Robert Balshaw and Albyn Jones). There is really no difference between using orthogonal polynomials of the form: Linear -3 -1 1 3 Quadratic 1 -1 -1 1 Cubic -1 3 -3 1 Versus > poly(c(1:4),3) 1 2 3 [1,] -0.6708204 0.5 -0.2236068 [2,] -0.2236068 -0.5 0.6708204 [3,] 0.2236068

Looking to the wonderful statistical advice that this group can offer. In behavioral science applications of stats, we are often introduced to coefficients for orthogonal polynomials that are nice integers. For instance, Kirk's experimental design book presents the following coefficients for p=4: Linear -3 -1 1 3 Quadratic 1 -1 -1 1 Cubic -1 3 -3 1 In R orthogonal

Full_Name: David Pleydell Version: 2.2.1 OS: Debian Etch Submission from: (NULL) (193.55.70.206) There appears to be a conflict between the chol functions from the Matrix and the SparseM packages. chol() can only be applied to a matrix of class dspMatrix if SparseM is not in the path. with gratitude David > library(Matrix) > sm <- as(as(Matrix(diag(5) + 1), "dsyMatrix"),

Hi I have the problem with fitting curve to data with lm and glm. When I use polynominal dependiency, fitted values from model are OK, but I cannot recive proper values when I use coefficents to caltulate this. Let me present simple example: I have simple data.frame: (dd) a: 1 2 3 4 5 6 b: 3 5 6 7 9 10 I try to fit it to model: model=glm(b~poly(a,3),data=dd) I have following data