similar to: coupled ODE population model

could someone explain why the name of FPVAL gets " .value" concatenated onto it when the code below is run and temp is returned. I've been trying to figure this out for too long. It doesn't matter when I put the FPVAL in the return statement. It happens regardless of whether it's first or last. Thanks. f.lmmultenhanced <- function(response, pred1, pred2) {

hi, i'm working with mgcv packages and specially gam. My exemple is: >test<-gam(B~s(pred1)+s(pred2)) >plot(test,pages=1) when ploting test, you can view pred1 vs s(pred1, edf[1] ) & pred2 vs s(pred2, edf[2] ) I would like to know if there is a way to access to those terms (s(pred1) & s(pred2)). Does someone know how? the purpose is to access to equation of smooths terms

Say I fit a logistic model and want to calculate an odds ratio between 2 sets of predictors. It is easy to obtain the difference in the predicted logodds using the predict() function, and thus get a point-estimate OR. But I can't see how to obtain the confidence interval for such an OR. For example: model <- glm(chd ~age.cat + male + lowed, family=binomial(logit)) pred1 <-

I'm new to R and am trying to extract the factors of a dataframe using numeric indices (e.g. df[1]) that are input to a function definition instead of the other types of references (e.g. df$out). df[1] is a list(?) whose class is "dataframe". These indexed lists can be printed successfuly but are not agreeable to the plot() and lm() functions shown below as are their df$out

I have a function that, among other things, runs a linear model and returns r2. But, the number of predictor variables passed to the function changes from 1 to 3. How can I change the formula inside the function depending on the number of variables passed in? An example: get.model.fit <- function(response.dat, pred1.dat, pred2.dat = NULL, pred3.dat = NULL) { res <- lm(response.dat ~

Dear all, I tried to run as.formula("x") and got an error message "Error: C stack usage 7971120 is too close to the limit" whether x exists or not. This is not the case in as.formula("y"), where "object 'y' not found" is the error message if y not exists, or "invalid formula" error or a formula depending on y. Can anyone confirm this is

Hi, I'm faced with the following problem and would appreciate some advice. I could have a data frame x that looks like this: aa bb a 1 "A" b 2 "B" The advantage of this is that I could access all the individual components easily. Also I could access all the rows and columns easily. Alternatively, I could have a list of

Hi All, I am looking at applications of percentiles to time sequenced data. I had just been using the quantile function to get percentiles over various periods, but am more interested in if there is an accepted (and/or R-implemented) method to apply weighting to the data so as to weigh recent data more heavily. I wrote the following function, but it seems quite inefficient, and not really very

Hi, My questions concerns the ROCR package and I hope somebody here on the list can help - or point me to some better place. When evaluating a model's performane, like this: pred1 <- predict(model, ..., type="response") pred2 <- prediction(pred1, binary_classifier_vector) perf <- performance(pred, "sens", "spec") (Where "prediction" and

Dear R users I have a question related to the interpretation of results based on GAMMs using Simon Woods package gamm4. I have repeated measurements (hours24) of subjects (vpnr) and one factor with three levels (pred). The outcome (dv) is binary. In the first model I'd like to test for differences among factor levels (main effects only): gamm.11<-gamm4(dv ~ pred +s(hours24), random = ~

For example, the correlation matrix is 3x3 and looks like 1 0.75 0 0 0 0.75 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Can I write the code like this? p<- 3 # number of variables per observation N<- 10 # number of samples # define population correlation matrix sigma sigma<-matrix(0,p,p) #creates a px p matrix of 0 rank<-2 for (i in 1:rank){ for (j in 1:rank){ rho<-0.75

Full_Name: Renaud Lancelot Version: Version 2.3.0 (2006-04-24) OS: MS Windows XP Pro SP2 Submission from: (NULL) (82.239.219.108) I think there is a bug in predict.lme, when a polynomial generated by poly() is used as an explanatory variable, and a new data.frame is used for predictions. I guess this is related to * not * using, for predictions, the coefs used in constructing the orthogonal

?s 12:13 de 13/07/2024, Christofer Bogaso escreveu: > Hi, > > I ran below code > > Dat = read.csv('https://raw.githubusercontent.com/sam16tyagi/Machine-Learning-techniques-in-python/master/logistic%20regression%20dataset-Social_Network_Ads.csv') > head(Dat) > Model = glm(Purchased ~ Gender, data = Dat, family = binomial()) > head(predict(Model,

Hi, I ran below code Dat = read.csv('https://raw.githubusercontent.com/sam16tyagi/Machine-Learning-techniques-in-python/master/logistic%20regression%20dataset-Social_Network_Ads.csv') head(Dat) Model = glm(Purchased ~ Gender, data = Dat, family = binomial()) head(predict(Model, type="response")) My_Predict = 1/(1+exp(-1 * (as.vector(coef(Model))[1] * as.vector(coef(Model))[2] *

Hello All,  I have used logistic regression glm in R and I am evaluating two models both learned with glm but with different predictors. model1 <- glm (Y ~ x4+ x5+ x6+ x7, data = dat, family = binomial(link=logit))model2 <- glm (Y~ x1 + x2 +x3 , data = dat, family = binomial(link=logit))  and I would like to compare these two models based on the prediction that I get from each model: pred1 =

Hi I'm trying to replicate Smith et al.'s (http://www.sciencemag.org/content/330/6008/1216.abstract) findings by fitting their Gompertz and logistic models to their data (given in their supplement). I'm doing this as I want to then apply the equations to my own data. Try as a might, I can't quite replicate them. Any thoughts why are much appreciated. I've tried contacting the

Dear friends of lme, After so many year with lme, I feel ashamed that I cannot get this to work. Maybe it's a syntax problem, but possibly a lack of understanding. We have growth curves of new dental bone that can well be modeled by a linear growth curve, for two different treatments and several subjects as random parameter. By definition, newbone is zero at t=0, so I tried to force the

G'day, All. I have been trying to trackdown a problem in my R analysis script. I perform a scale() operation on a matrix then do further work. Is there any way of inverting the scale() such that sX <- scale(X) Xprime <- inv.scale(x); # does inv.scale exist? resulting in Xprime_{ij} == X_{ij} where Xprime_{ij} \in R There must be some way of doing it but I'm such a newb

Hi, I have found quite a few posts on normality checking of response variables, but I am still in doubt about that. As it is easy to understand I'm not a statistician so be patient please. I want to estimate the possible effects of some predictors on my response variable that is nº of males and nº of females (cbind(males,females)), so, it would be:

Hi R experts :) I'm trying to carry out a survival model on my data, but I am unsure of whether it's appropriate or if I should do something specific in regards to hazard. My data is time to death by predator where I have 8 prey and one predator in the setting. This means that two prey can't possibly die at the same time and I can't quite get my head around how to include this in