similar to: term.formula error when updating an nls object

Dear R experts. I might be missing something obvious. I have been trying to fix this problem for some weeks. Please help. #data ped <- c(rep(1, 4), rep(2, 3), rep(3, 3)) y <- rnorm(10, 8, 2) # variable set 1 M1a <- sample (c(1, 2,3), 10, replace= T) M1b <- sample (c(1, 2,3), 10, replace= T) M1aP1 <- sample (c(1, 2,3), 10, replace= T) M1bP2 <- sample (c(1, 2,3), 10, replace= T)

[posted to R-devel, no discussion: resubmitting it as a bug, just so it gets logged appropriately] Sorry to report further difficulties with nls and profiling and constraints ... the problem this time (which I didn't check for in my last round of testing) is that the nls profiler doesn't seem to respect constraints that have been set when using the port algorithm. See test code

Dear Members, I have two estimated transition matrices and I want to compare them. In fact I want to check the hypothesis if they come from the same process. I tried to look for some test but all I found was independence test of contingency tables. The following code shows that the usual chi-squared test statistic does not follow chisq distribution. MCRepl <- 5000 khi12 <- rep(0,MCRepl)

Sorry I had typo in previous email, this typo corrected version: Dear R experts I have simple question, please execuse me: #example data, the real data consists of 20000 pairs of variables K1 <- c(1,2,1, 1, 1,1); K2 <- c(1, 1,2,2, 1,2); K3 <- c(3, 1, 3, 3, 1, 3) M1a <- rep( K1, 100); M1b <- rep(K2, 100) M2a <- rep(K1, 100); M2b <- rep(K1, 100) M3a <- rep(K1, 100); M3b

Dear R users, I have now tried out several options of obtaining p-values for (quasi)poisson lmer models, including Markov-chain Monte Carlo sampling and single-term deletions with subsequent chi-square tests (although I am aware that the latter may be problematic). However, I encountered several problems that can be classified as (1) the quasipoisson lmer model does not give p-values when

Quiero comparar varias dosis letales 50% (LD50) usando análisis probit. He seguido un ejemplo que viene en paquete DRC, pero no obtengo el resultado esperado. Lo que quiero es saber si las LD50s, son diferentes y si la diferencias son estadísticamente significativas. Gracias de antemano. José Arturo e-mail. jafarfan@uady.mx <grejon@uady.mx> e-mail alterno. jafarfan@gmail.com

Sorry to report further difficulties with nls and profiling and constraints ... the problem this time (which I didn't check for in my last round of testing) is that the nls profiler doesn't seem to respect constraints that have been set when using the port algorithm. See test code below ... If I can I will try to hack the code, but I will probably start by redefining my function with

Hi all, I have two time series that I would like to correlate but as they are autocorrelated, I am "pre-whitening" them first by fitting ARIMA models, then correlating their residuals....as described in https://onlinecourses.science.psu.edu/stat510/?q=node/75 However, http://www.stat.pitt.edu/stoffer/tsa2/Rissues.htm discusses some issues with ARIMA in R. In particular, for issue 2, if

Dear R Helpers, I have noticed that when I use lmer to analyse data, the summary function gives different values for the AIC, BIC and log-likelihood compared with the anova function. Here is a sample program #make some data set.seed(1); datx=data.frame(array(runif(720),c(240,3),dimnames=list(NULL,c('x1','x2','y' )))) id=rep(1:120,2); datx=cbind(id,datx) #give x1 a

THANKS so very much for your help (previous and future!). I have a two follow-up questions. 1) You say that dispersion = 1 by definition ....dispersion changes from 1 to 13.5 when I go from binomial to quasibinomial....does this suggest that I should use the binomial? i.e., is the dispersion factor more important that the 2) Is there a cutoff for too much overdispersion - mine seems to be

Full_Name: Tao Shi Version: 1.7.0 OS: Windows XP Professional Submission from: (NULL) (149.142.163.65) > x [,1] [,2] [1,] 149 151 [2,] 1 8 > c2x<-chisq.test(x, simulate.p.value=T, B=100000)$p.value > for(i in (1:20)){c2x<-c(c2x,chisq.test(x, simulate.p.value=T,B=100000)$p.value)} > c2tx<-chisq.test(t(x), simulate.p.value=T, B=100000)$p.value > for(i in

Hi, I am trying to test some contrasts, using glht() in multcomp package on fixed effects in a linear mixed model fitted with lme() in nlme package. The command I used is: ## a simple randomized block design, ## type is fixed effect ## batch is random effect ## model with interaction dat.lme<-lme(info.index~type, random=~1|batch/type, data=dat) glht(dat.lme, linfct = mcp(type

Hi, I''ve got a newbie question--sorry if this is covered elsewhere, I parsed through the archives for awhile and didn''t see it. I''d like to listen for whenever a file is renamed (e.g. foo.txt -> foo.old) and then magically change it back. This sounds odd, but I''m working with a stubborn application and this will actually make things work nice. So, if I do: