similar to: ARIMA simulation including a constant

Hi, All, This is my program ts1.sim <- arima.sim(list(order = c(1,1,0), ar = c(0.7)), n = 200) ts2.sim <- arima.sim(list(order = c(1,1,0), ar = c(0.5)), n = 200) tdata<-ts(c(ts1.sim[-1],ts2.sim[-1])) tre<-c(rep(0,200),rep(1,200)) gender<-rbinom(400,1,.5) x<-matrix(0,2,400) x[1,]<-tre x[2,]<-gender fit <- arima(tdata, c(1, 1, 0), method = "CSS",xreg=t(x))

Thanks, Can't find an ARIMA in base, dse1/2 or tseries, only references to. What package is it in? Thanks again! Best regards, /fb -.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.- r-help mailing list -- Read http://www.ci.tuwien.ac.at/~hornik/R/R-FAQ.html Send "info", "help", or "[un]subscribe" (in the "body", not the

I'd like to play with ARIMA models of stock prices, but I am a complete novice. Could some kind soul explain the relationship among packages "ts", "tseries", "dse", "dse2", and "fracdiff"? Are they 'competing' products or does one depend on another? Where would be the best place for a novice to begin? Thanks for any advice. PS. I

Full_Name: Arto Luoma Version: 1.1.0 OS: Windows 98 Submission from: (NULL) (153.1.53.119) In arima0 it is possible to specify whether the mean of the original series is included in the model or not. However, it is not possible to specify whether the mean of the differenced series is included. It seems that it is not included. However, if differencing is used to eliminate trend, the mean of the

Hello, I'm an R newbie. I've tried to search, but my search skills don't seem up to finding what I need. (Maybe I don't know the correct terms?) I need the standard errors and not the confidence intervals from an ARIMA fit. I can get fits: > coef(test) ar1 ma1 intercept time(TempVector) - 1900

Full_Name: Allan McRae Version: 1.6.0 OS: Win 2000 P Submission from: (NULL) (129.215.190.229) When using predict.Arima in library ts(), it appears differencing is only accounted for in the first step of prediction and so any trend is not apparent in the predictions. The example shows the difference between the predictions of an arima(1,1,1) model and the backtransformed predictions of an

In R 2.15.2 (and not before), in the definition of function 'diffinv.vector' in package stats, there is difference <- as.integer(differences) I believe differences <- as.integer(differences) is intended, because 'difference' is not referenced anywhere. However, without conversion of 'differences' to integer, 'diffinv.vector' in R 2.15.2 works OK. Also,

I don't think arima works exactly the way one would expect when there is differencing. What I think should happen is that by default the mean of the differenced series is estimated and if include.mean=F, then it is not. This is not what happens. Instead when there is differencing the include.mean argument is ignored. Now I guess, someone could argue that the mean of the original series

Hallo all somebody knows if exist a command who makes the opposite of what "diff" command do? I'he to write code? thanks Michele

Hi all, I was running the adf test in R. CODE 1: adf.test(data$LOSS) Augmented Dickey-Fuller Test data: data$LOSS Dickey-Fuller = -1.9864, Lag order = 2, p-value = 0.5775 alternative hypothesis: stationary CODE 2: adf.test(diff(diff(data$LOSS))) Augmented Dickey-Fuller Test data: diff(diff(data$LOSS)) Dickey-Fuller = -6.9287, Lag order = 2, p-value = 0.01 alternative

Hello everyone, I was trying to fit an arima model to a daily historical data, but, for some reason, havent been able to. I basically have 212 observations (from 12/1/2012 to 06/30/2013) containing the number of transits for a particular vessel. The following messages are produced by R: dailytrans.fit<-arima(dailytrans$transits, order=c(0,1,2), seasonal=list(order=c(0,1,2), period=365),

On 21 May 2015, at 10:35 , Martin Maechler <maechler at lynne.stat.math.ethz.ch> wrote: >> >> I noticed that the 3.2.1 release cycle is about to start. Is there any >> chance that this fix will make it into the next version of R? >> >> This bug is fairly serious: getting the wrong variance estimate leads to >> the wrong log-likelihood and the wrong

Hi, My query is related to ARIMA function in stats package. While looking for the time series literature I found following link which highlights discrepancy in "arima" function while dealing with differenced time series. Is there a substitute function similar to "sarima" mentioned in the following website implemened in R? Any pointers would be of great help.

Good evening! I have a question regarding forecast package and time series analysis. My syntax: x<-c(253, 252, 275, 275, 272, 254, 272, 252, 249, 300, 244, 258, 255, 285, 301, 278, 279, 304, 275, 276, 313, 292, 302, 322, 281, 298, 305, 295, 286, 327, 286, 270, 289, 293, 287, 267, 267, 288, 304, 273, 264, 254, 263, 265, 278) library(forecast) arima(x, order=c(1,1,2),

Hello, The "arma" function in the "tseries" package allows estimation of models with specific "ar" and "ma" lags with its "lag" argument. For example: y[t] = a[0] + a[1]y[t-3] +b[1]e[t-2] + e[t] can be estimated with the following specification : arma(y, lag=list(ar=3,ma=2)). Is this possible with the "arima" function in the

>>>>> Patrick Perry <pperry at stern.nyu.edu> >>>>> on Wed, 27 May 2015 23:19:09 -0400 writes: {@PP, you forgot this part:} >>>>> peter dalgaard <pdalgd at gmail.com> >>>>> on Thu, 21 May 2015 14:36:03 +0200 writes: >> I suspect that what we really need is >> >> fitI <- lm(x ~

Another pathological test. arima does not crash for that series that crashes arma: arima(c(2.01, 2.22, 2.09, 2.17, 2.42), order=c(1,0,0)) However, arima crashes for this: arima(c(1.71, 1.78, 1.95, 1.59, 2.13), order=c(1,0,0)) arima seems pretty consistent in its crashing behaviour, since crashing for one series means crashing for all affine series: lets.crash.arima <- c(71, 78, 95, 59,

On 21 May 2015, at 12:49 , Martin Maechler <maechler at lynne.stat.math.ethz.ch> wrote: >>>>>> peter dalgaard <pdalgd at gmail.com> >>>>>> on Thu, 21 May 2015 11:03:05 +0200 writes: > >> On 21 May 2015, at 10:35 , Martin Maechler <maechler at lynne.stat.math.ethz.ch> wrote: > >>>> >>>> I noticed that

I did a regression with ARMA errors using arima0 with ari<-arima0(y,order=c(2,0,2),xreg=reg1,delta=-1) or ari<-arima0(y,order=c(2,0,2),xreg=reg1) where reg1 is the matrix of the regressors and when I see diag(ari$var.coef) I get negative terms. Do you know what this mean ? I try to change transform.pars to 0 or 1 but this crash R on Windows. Is it possible to test the significativity

I noticed that the 3.2.1 release cycle is about to start. Is there any chance that this fix will make it into the next version of R? This bug is fairly serious: getting the wrong variance estimate leads to the wrong log-likelihood and the wrong AIC, BIC etc, which can and does lead to suboptimal model selection. If it's not fixed, this issue will affect every student taking our time series