similar to: Looping with incremented object name and increment function

Dear R users, Could somebody please help me to find a way of comparing nonlinear, non-nested models in R, where the number of parameters is not necessarily different? Here is a sample (growth rates, y, as a function of internal substrate concentration, x): x <- c(0.52, 1.21, 1.45, 1.64, 1.89, 2.14, 2.47, 3.20, 4.47, 5.31, 6.48) y <- c(0.00, 0.35, 0.41, 0.49, 0.58, 0.61, 0.71, 0.83, 0.98,

Dear List, After including cluster() option the coxreg (from eha package) produces results slightly different than that of coxph (from survival) in the following time-dependent treatment effect calculation (example is used just to make the point). Will appreciate any explaination / comment. cheers, Ehsan ############################ require(survival) require(eha) data(heart) # create weights

Hi, I am working with R version 2.1.0, and I seem to have run into what looks like a bug. I get the same error message when I run R on Windows as well as when I run it on Linux. When I call anova to do a LR test from inside a function, I get an error. The same call works outside of a function. It appears to not find the right environment when called from inside a function. I have provided

Dear R-users, I have noticed small discrepencies in the reported estimate of the variance of the frailty by the print method for survreg() and the 'theta' component included in the object fit: # Examples in R-2.6.2 for Windows library(survival) # version 2.34-1 (2008-03-31) # discrepancy fit1 <- survreg(Surv(time, status) ~ rx + frailty(litter), rats) fit1 fit1$history[[1]]$theta

I try to send this message To Gordon Smyth at smyth at vehi,edu.au but it bounced back, so here it is to r-help I am trying to use limma, just downloaded it from CRAN. I use R 2.0.1 on Win XP see the following: > library(RODBC) > chan1 <- odbcConnectExcel("D:/Data/mgc/Chips/Chips4.xls") > dd <- sqlFetch(chan1,"Raw") # all data 12000 > # > nzw <-

Hi- I am trying to fit a log function to my data, with the ultimate goal of finding the second derivative of the function. However, I am stalled on the first step of fitting a curve. When I use the following code: FG2.model<-(nls((CO2~log(a*Time)+b), start=setNames(coef(lm(CO2 ~ log(Time), data=FG2)), c("a", "b")),data=FG2)) I get the following error: Error in

Hi I have the following formula (I hope it is clear - if no, I can try to do better the next time) h(x, a, b) = integral(0 to pi/2) ( ( integral(D/sin(alpha) to Inf) ( ( f(x, a, b) ) dx ) dalpha ) and I want to do an mle with it. I know how to use mle() and I also know about integrate(). My problem is to give the parameter values a and b to the

Dear all, I'm getting an error in one of the stock examples in the 'mvpart' package. I tried: require(mvpart) data(spider) fit3 <- rpart(gdist(spider[,1:12],meth="bray",full=TRUE,sq=TRUE)~water+twigs+reft+herbs+moss+sand,spider,method="dist") #directly from ?rpart summary(fit3) ...which returned the following: Error in apply(formatg(yval, digits - 3), 1,

I stumbled across a mild glitch when trying to compare the result of gam() fitting with the result of lm() fitting. The following code demonstrates the problem: library(gam) x <- rep(1:10,10) set.seed(42) y <- rnorm(100) fit1 <- lm(y~x) fit2 <- gam(y~lo(x)) fit3 <- lm(y~factor(x)) print(anova(fit1,fit2)) # No worries. print(anova(fit1,fit3)) # Likewise. print(anova(fit2,fit3)) #

Hello. I am fitting a two-level mixed model which assumes equality of variance in the lowest-level residuals across groups. The call is: fit3<-lme(CLnNAR~CLnRGR,data=meta.analysis, + na.action="na.omit",random=~1+CLnRGR|study.code) I want to test the assumption of equality of variances across groups at the lowest level. Can someone tell me how to do this? I know that one

Hi, I want to do a global likelihood ratio test for the proportional odds logistic regression model and am unsure how to go about it. I am using the polr() function in library(MASS). 1. Is the p-value from the likelihood ratio test obtained by anova(fit1,fit2), where fit1 is the polr model with only the intercept and fit2 is the full polr model (refer to example below)? So in the case of the

Hello R users & R friends, I just want to ask you if density() can produce a confidence interval, indicating how "certain" the density() line follows the true frequency distribution based on the sample you feed into density(). I've heard of loess.predict(loess(y ~ x), se=TRUE) which gives you a SE estimate of the smoothed scatterplot - but density() kernel smoothing is not the

Hi all, I was wondering if there is a function out there, or someone has written code for making confidence intervals around model averaged predictions (y~á+âx). The model average estimates are from the dRedging library? It seems a common thing but I can't seem to find one via the search engines Examples of the models are: fit1 <- glm(y~ dbh, family = binomial, data = data) fit2 <-

I am trying to find methods for testing and visualizing calibration to Cox models with time-depended coefficients. I have read this nice article <http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0962280213497434>. In this paper, we can fit three models: fit0 <- coxph(Surv(futime, status) ~ x1 + x2 + x3, data = data0) p <- log(predict(fit0, newdata = data1, type = "expected")) lp

Dear all, I have 3 models (from simple to complex) and I want to compare them in order to see if they fit equally well or not. From the R prompt I am not able to see where I can get this information. Let´s do an example: fit1<- lm(response ~ stimulus + condition + stimulus:condition, data=scrd) #EQUIVALE A lm(response ~ stimulus*condition, data=scrd) fit2<- lm(response ~ stimulus +

First, as others have said please obey the mailing list rules and turn of First, as others have said please obey the mailing list rules and turn off html, not everyone uses an html email client. Here is your code, formatted and with line numbers added. I also fixed one error: "y" should be "status". 1. fit0 <- coxph(Surv(futime, status) ~ x1 + x2 + x3, data = data0) 2. p

How can I from the summary function, decide which glm (fit1, fit2 or fit3) fits to data best? I don't know what to look after, so I would please explain the important output. > fit1 <- glm(Y~X, family=gaussian(link="identity")) > fit2 <- glm(Y~X, family=gaussian(link="log")) > fit3 <- glm(Y~X, family=Gamma(link="log")) > summary(fit1) Call:

Dear list, I am getting weired with fitting data with a 1/x-polynomial. Suggest I have the following data: x <- c(1,2,3,4,5,6,7) y <- c(100,20,4,2,1,.3,.1) I may fit this with a linear model fit1 = lm(y ~ I(x)) Getting plot out of this model I applied library(polynom) pol1 = polynomial(fit1$coefficients) f1 = as.function(pol1) plot(x,y) lines(x, f1(x), col = 2) Clearly, this model

System: R 2.3.1 on Windows XP machine. I am building a logistic regression model for a sample of 100 cases in dataframe "d", in which there are 3 binary covariates: x1, x2 and x3. ---------------- > summary(d) y x1 x2 x3 0:54 0:50 0:64 0:78 1:46 1:50 1:36 1:22 > fit <- glm(y ~ x1 + x2 + x3, data=d, family=binomial(link=logit)) >

Hi, I am just wondering if there is a test available for testing if a linear fit of an independent variable in a Cox regression is enough? Thanks for any suggestions. John Zhang ____________________________________________________________________________________ [[elided Yahoo spam]]