similar to: lm, coefficient 'not defined because of singularities'? What does this mean?

Hello, I have a data set which I am using to find a model with the most significant parameters included and most importantly, the p-values. The full model is of the form: sad[,1]~b_1 sad[,2]+b_2 sad[,3]+b_3 sad[,4]+b_4 sad[,5]+b_5 sad[,6]+b_6 sad[,7]+b_7 sad[,8]+b_8 sad[,9]+b_9 sad[,10], where the 9 variables on the right hand side are all indicator variables. The thing I don't understand

I run lm to fit an OLS model where one of the covariates is a factor with 30 levels. I use contr.treatment() to set the base level of the factor, so when I run lm() no coefficients are estimated for that level. But in addition (and regardless of which level I choose to be the base), lm also gives a vector of NA coefficients for another level of my factor. The output says that these coefficients

Hello, I am trying to run a linear regression analysis on my data set. For some reason most variables are removed due to singularities. My linear regression looks this way (I am using only partial data, which is selected by flags): fm<-lm(log(cplex6.time..sec..[flags]) ~ cplex6.cities[flags] + log(1/features.meanOver.frust[flags]) + log(1/features.meanOver.minDist[flags]) + [...]

Hello, I want to specify a linear regression model in which the metric outcome is predicted by two factors and their interaction. glm() computes effects for each factor level and the levels of the interaction. In the case of singularities glm() displays "NA" for the corresponding coefficients. However, svyglm() aborts with an error message. Is there a possibility that svyglm()

Hello, i have the following model, poi1<-glm(F~S+T+L+C,family=poisson,x=T) where F,S,T,L are metric and C is a factor variable with the levels "0", "1", "2", "3", "4", "5" and "6" if i do summary(poi1), i get the following Call: glm(formula = F ~ S + T + L + C, family = poisson, x = T) Deviance Residuals: Min

Hi- I'm wrestling with some of my data apparently not being called into a GLM or an LM. I'm looking at factors affecting fish annual catch rates (ie. CPUE) over 30 years. Two of the factors I'm using are sea surface temperature and sea surface temperature anomaly. A small sample of my data is below: CPUE Year Vessel_ID Base_Port Boat_Lgth Planing SST Anomaly 0.127

I am using a nested model in R and the lm output shows 47 not defined because of singularities and I have no idea why. Any help on why this is happening or how to fix this problem would be very much appreciated. Below is the output I received from R. Thanks and happy holidays! Call: lm(formula = Dist ~ Treatment/SiteL/Territory) Residuals: Min 1Q Median 3Q Max -6.646 -1.443

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 I got the report Coefficients: (1 not defined because of singularities) while trying to get my model's coefficients from lm() What shall I do to avoid it and get the one missing coefficient? Thank you. lukas - -- Lukas Kubin lukas.kubin at permonik.com phone: 00420603836180 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.5 (GNU/Linux)

How would I find the Percent of FuelTypeNum within the Band given AvailableMW? example: type 1 is 1% of PB0 type 2 is 54% of PB0 type 4 is 4% of PB0 type 5 is 42% of PB0 Note: the Bands and fuel types are not always constant. Data: FuelTypeNum Bands AvailableMW AvailableMWNewFormat 1 PB0 185319 185.319 2 PB0 18352000 18352 4 PB0 1338785 1338.785 5 PB0 14189756 14189.756 2 PB1

R friends, In a matrix of 1s and 0s, I'm getting a singularity error. Any helpful ideas? lm(formula = activity ~ metaF + metaCl + metaBr + metaI + metaMe + paraF + paraCl + paraBr + paraI + paraMe) Residuals: Min 1Q Median 3Q Max -4.573e-01 -7.884e-02 3.469e-17 6.616e-02 2.427e-01 Coefficients: (1 not defined because of singularities)

Dear R users I read two csv data files into R and called them Tem1 and Tem5. For the first column, data in Tem1 has 13 digits where in Tem5 there are 14 digits for each observation. Originally there are 'numerical' as can be seen in my code below. But how can I display/convert them using other form rather than scientific notations which seems a standard/default? I want them to be in

This command cdmoutcome<- glm(log(value)~factor(year) > +log(gdppcpppconst)+log(gdppcpppconstAII) > +log(co2eemisspc)+log(co2eemisspcAII) > +log(dist) > +fdiboth > +odapartnertohost > +corrupt > +log(infraindex) > +litrate > +africa >

Hi all, When using lm to model a response with 8 explanatory variables, one of the variables is not defined due to "singularities". I have checked the csv file from which the data come, there are no na's in the dataset, etc. What should I be looking for in this variable to correct the problem? Thanks for any help. Robin Williams Met Office summer intern - Health Forecasting

Hi all, I try to represent a multiple curve graphic where the x-axis is the temperature and the different y-axes are the different X (X22,X43,X44...) some X corresponds to the same molecule (22 and 44 are for CO2 for instance) so I use the same colour for them. I wanna mix the linetype with the colour to be able to visually see the difference between X43 and X45 The best I have done up to now

coef() and vcov() have different dimensions if a model contains alised parameters as the following example illustrates. A search on "alised" gave noting as far as I could see. Is this a known bug? Bendix C ---------------------- Bendix Carstensen Senior Statistician Steno Diabetes Center Niels Steensens Vej 2 DK-2820 Gentofte Denmark tel: +45 44 43 87 38 mob: +45 30 75 87 38 fax: +45

Hi, I am hoping some one can help with this. I am using nlme to fit a random coefficients model. It ran for hours before returning Error: Singularity in backsolve at level 0, block 1 The model is > plavix.nlme<-nlme(PLX_NRX~loglike(PLX_NRX,PD4_42D,GAT_34D,VIS_42D,MSL_42D,SPE_ROL,XM2_DUM,THX_DUM,b0,b1,b2,b3,b4,b5,b6,b7,alpha), + data=data, + fixed=list(b0 +

Dear list, I would like to simulate individual survival times from a model that has been fitted using the survreg procedure (library survival). Output shown below. My plan is to extract the shape and scale arguments for use with rweibull() since my error terms are assumed to be Weibull, but it does not make any sense. The mean survival time is easy to predict, but I would like to simulate

Hi there, I would like to draw a scatter plot and fit a smooth line by loess. Below is the data. However, the curve line started from 0, which my "resid" list doesn't consist of 0 value. It returned some warnings which I don't know if this is the reason affecting such problem. Here I also attached the warning messages. Please let me know if there is a solution to fix this. Thank

Using lmer() on my data results in an error. The problem, I think, is my model specification. However, lm() works ok. I recreated this error with a more simple dataset. (See code below.) # word and letter recognition data # two within factors: # word length: 4, 5, 6 letters # letter position: 1-4 (in 4-letter words), 1-5 (in 5-letter words), 1-6 (in 6-letter words) # one dependent variable: #

http://biomet.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/reprint/86/3/677 biometrika1999 http://biomet.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/reprint/94/4/1006 biometrika2000 Hi All: I just want to try some luck. I am currenly working on my project,one part of my project is to reanalysis the kenward cattle data by using the method in Mohsen's paper,but I found I really can get the same or close output as he did,so,any