similar to: nlme Singularity in backsolve at level 0, block 1

Hello all, I would like to fit a mixed effects model, but my response is of the negative binomial (or overdispersed poisson) family. The only (?) package that looks like it can do this is glmm.ADMB (but it cannot run on Mac OS X - please correct me if I am wrong!) [1] I think that glmmML {glmmML}, lmer {Matrix}, and glmmPQL {MASS} do not provide this "family" (i.e. nbinom, or

Hey, Does anyone know if there is a way to get back from goodfit what it estimated the parameters to be? I used the code fit<-goodfit(round(data$PLX_NRX),type="nbinomial" and got a pretty good fit. I could not however duplicate this good fit with any parameter estimates that I had. Any ideas??? Thanks, Elizabeth Lawson ---------------------------------

This issue ties loosely into other recent S4 topics on this board. The methods package defines a number of implicit generics for linear algebra related functions (rcond, norm, backsolve) that, when used, interfere with base package operations. Here is the cut-and-paste version of the code the illustrates the problem: # rcond x1 <- cbind(1, 1:10) rcond(x1) setGeneric("rcond")

>>>>> "JonR" == Jonathan Rougier <J.C.Rougier@durham.ac.uk> writes: JonR> ... By the way, I have `solve' JonR> methods for triangular matrices and variance matrices -- would JonR> you be interested? { Jonathan, I hope it's okay if I CC this to R-devel; this must be of a wider interest } Ye.e..s; for triangular ones,

Drug US1 US2 Aptecha Celebrex 235.54 269.99 121.02 Detrol LA 157.99 190.99 55.3 Flomax 166.00 190.99 93.45 Lipitor 174.99 200.99 137.7 Novaldex 108.6 129.99 22.48 Norvasc 186.66 203.99 161.93 Plavix 107.99 106.99 64.53 Prevacid 117.39 134.99 59.83 Prilosec 115.99 126.99 57.75 Zyrtec 181.1 200.99 58.79 US1=c(235.54,157.99,166,174.99,108.60,186.66,107.99,117.39,115.99,181.10)

I've added a "backsolve" method to the bdsmatrix library. Per the Extending manual section 7.1 I've also added the following 3 lines along with my setMethod definitions for 2 classes. backsolve <- function(r, ...) UseMethod("backsolve") backsolve.default <- base:::backsolve formals(backsolve.default) <- c(formals(backsolve.default), alist(... = )) I've

I'm hoping that someone with deeper insight into S4 than I, that is to say virtually everyone reading this list, could help resolve the following problem in SparseM. We have setGeneric("backsolve", function(r, x, k = NULL, upper.tri = NULL, transpose = NULL, twice = TRUE, ...) standardGeneric("backsolve"), useAsDefault= function(r, x,

I get the following error from one of my Rd files in R CMD check (R 2-14.0) * checking Rd files ... WARNING Error in switch(attr(block, "Rd_tag"), TEXT = if (!grepl("^[[:space:]]* $", : EXPR must be a length 1 vector problem found in ?backsolve.Rd? This is likely something that will be glaringly obvious once it's pointed out, but without a line number I can't

Hi, I am trying to convert the following NLMIXED code to NLME, but am running into problems concerning 'Singularity in backsolve'. As I am new to R/S-Plus, I thought I may be missing something in the NLME code. NLMIXED *********** proc nlmixed data=kidney.kidney; parms delta=0.03 gamma=1.1 b1=-0.003 b2=-1.2 b3=0.09 b4=0.35 b5=-1.43 varu=0.5; eta=b1*age+b2*sex+b3*gn+b4*an+b5*pkn+u;

I need to find solutions to a tridiagonal system. By this I mean a set of linear equations Ax = d where A is a square matrix containing elements A[i,i-1], A[i,i] and A[i,i+1] for i in 1:nrow, and zero elsewhere. R is probably not the ideal way to do this, but this is part of a larger problem that requires R. In my application it is much easier (and much faster) to generate the diagonal and

Hi I'm trying to use ouch's hansen and brown functions but I get the error: > brown(logflatnodes,archotreeouch) Error in backsolve(l, x, k = k, upper.tri = upper.tri, transpose = transpose) : NA/NaN/Inf in foreign function call (arg 1) and with hansen also: Error in optim(par = c(sqrt.alpha, sigma), fn = function(par) { : function cannot be evaluated at initial parameters

Hi, For another trainingset I get this error message, which again is rather cryptic to me: Setting default kernel parameters Error in array(0, c(n, p)) : 'dim' specifies too large an array RMate stopped at line 0 of selection Calls: rvm ... .local -> backsolve -> as.matrix -> chol -> diag -> array thanks for any suggestions!

Hi all, I would like to fit a gamm model of the form: Y~X+X*f(z) Where f is the smooth function and With random effects on X and on the intercept. So, I try to write it like this: gam.lme<- gamm(Y~ s(z, by=X) +X, random=list(groups=pdDiag(~1+X)) ) but I get the error message : Error in MEestimate(lmeSt, grps) : Singularity in backsolve at level 0, block 1

I am trying to run a GLMM on some binomial data. My fixed factors include 2 dichotomous variables, day, and distance. When I run the model: modelA<-glmmPQL(Leaving~Trial*Day*Dist,random=~1|Indiv,family="binomial") I get the error: iteration 1 Error in MEEM(object, conLin, control$niterEM) : Singularity in backsolve at level 0, block 1 >From looking at previous help

Dear R-help, Why can't lme cope with an incomplete whole plot when analysing a split-plot experiment? For example: R : Copyright 2006, The R Foundation for Statistical Computing Version 2.3.1 (2006-06-01) > library(nlme) > attach(Oats) > nitro <- ordered(nitro) > fit <- lme(yield ~ Variety*nitro, random=~1|Block/Variety) > anova(fit) numDF denDF F-value

Hi, We have data of two groups of subjects: 32 elderly, 14 young adults. for each subject we have 15 observations, each observation consisting of a reaction-time measure (RT) and an activation maesure (betadlpcv). since we want to analyze the influence of (age-)group and RT on the activation, we call: lme(betadlpcv ~ RT*group, data=our.data, random=~ RT |subject) this yields: Error in

Dear R-ers, I am having trouble understanding why I am getting an error using glmmPQL (library MASS). I am getting the following error: iteration 1 Error in MEEM(object, conLin, control$niterEM) : Singularity in backsolve at level 0, block 1 The long story: I have data from an experiment on pairwise comparisons between 3 treatments (a, b, c). So a typical run of an experiment

I'm trying to read data a program produces in matrixmarket array format into R and its giving me fits. I've tried read.MM (below) and readMM (from the Matrix package) but neither works. One of them says array format isn't supported, the other reports something indecipherable about Fortran. Here's the file contents. Can't get much simpler than that! %%MatrixMarket matrix array

Hello, Excuse me for posting two questions in one day, but I figured it would be better to ask my questions in separate emails. I will again give the caveat that I'm not a statistician by training, but have a fairly decent understanding of probability and likelihood. As before, I'm trying to fit a nonlinear model to a dataset which has two main factors using nlme. Within the dataset

Dear R users I am trying to obtain p-values for (quasi)poisson lmer models, including Markov-chain Monte Carlo sampling and the command summary. > > My problems is that p values derived from both these methods are totally different. My question is (1) there a bug in my code and > (2) How can I proceed, left with these uncertainties in the estimations of > the p-values? > > Below