similar to: X-axis labels in histograms drawn by the "truehist" function

Hi, I would like to solve a system of coupled ordinary differential equations, where there is a delay (time lag) term. I would like to use the "lsoda" function "odesolve" package. However, I am not sure how to specify the delay term using the syntax allowed by odesolve. Here is an example of the kind of problem that I am trying to solve: > library(odesolve)

Hi, I have a data file, certain lines of which are character fields. I would like to skip these rows, and read the data file as a numeric data frame. I know that I can skip lines at the beginning with read.table and scan, but is there a way to skip a specified sequence of lines (e.g., 1, 2, 10, 11, 19, 20, 28, 29, etc.) ? If I read the entire data file, and then delete the character

Hi, I apologize for this repeat posting, which I first posted yesterday. I would appreciate any hints on solving this problem: I have two matrices A (m x 2) and B (n x 2), where m and n are large integers (on the order of 10^4). I am looking for an efficient way to create another matrix, W (m x n), which can be defined as follows: for (i in 1:m){ for (j in 1:n) { W[i,j] <-

Hi, Suppose I have a multivariate response Y (n x k) obtained at a set of predictors X (n x p). I would like to perform a linear regression taking into consideration the covariance structure of Y within each unit - this would be represented by a specified matrix V (k x k), assumed to be the same across units. How do I use "lm" to do this? One approach that I was thinking of

Hi, I am trying to do the following computation: p <- rep(0, n) coef <- runif(K+1) U <- matrix(runif(n*(2*K+1)), n, 2*K+1) for (i in 0:K){ for (j in 0:K){ p <- p + coef[i+1]* coef[j+1] * U[,i+j+1] } } I would appreciate any suggestions on how to perform this computation efficiently without the "for" loops? Thank

Hello, I want to find the roots of an equation in two variables. I am aware of the uniroot function, which can do this for a function with a single variable (as I understand it...) but cannot find a function that does this for an equation with more than one variable. I am looking for something implementing similar to a Newton-Raphson algorithm. Thanks. -- Bill Shipley North American Editor for

Hi, Given a positive integer N, and a real number \lambda such that 0 < \lambda < 1, I would like to generate an N by N stochastic matrix (a matrix with all the rows summing to 1), such that it has the second largest eigenvalue equal to \lambda (Note: the dominant eigenvalue of a stochastic matrix is 1). I don't care what the other eigenvalues are. The second eigenvalue is

Hi, I have noticed that there is a change in the use of ellipses or . in R versions 2.6.1 and later. In versions 2.5.1 and earlier, the . were always at the end of the argument list, but in 2.6.1 they are placed after the main arguments and before method control arguments. This results in the user having to specify the exact (complete) names of the control arguments, i.e. partial matching is

Dear R-users I would like to integrate something like \int_k^\infty (1 - F(x)) dx, where F(.) is a cumulative distribution function. As mentioned in the "integrate" help-page: integrate(dnorm,0,20000) ## fails on many systems. This does not happen for an adaptive Simpson or Lobatto quadrature (cf. Matlab). Even though I am hardly familiar with numerical integration the implementation

Hi, Where can I find the source code for nlm()? I dowloaded the R2.8.1.tar.gz file and looked at all the .c and .f files, but couldn't find either nlm.c or nlm.f There is an nlm.r file, but that is not useful. Thanks for any help, Ravi. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------- Ravi Varadhan, Ph.D. Assistant Professor, The Center on Aging

i want to estimate parameters with maximum likelihood method with contraints (contant numbers). for example sum(Ai)=0 and sum(Bi)=0 i have done it without the constraints but i realised that i have to use the contraints. Without constraints(just a part-not complete): skellamreg_LL=function(parameters,z,design) { n=length(z); mu=parameters[1]; H=parameters[2]; Apar=parameters[3:10];

Hi, We (Paul Gilbert and I) have just released a new R package on CRAN called "BB" (stands for Barzilai-Borwein) that provides functionality for solving large-scale (and small-scale) nonlinear system of equations. Until now, R didn't have any functionality for solving nonlinear systems. We hope that this package fills that need. We also have an implementation of the

Hey fellas: I would like to integrate the following function: integrand <- function (x,t) { exp(-2*t)*(2*t)^x/(10*factorial(x)) } with respect to the t variable, from 0 to 10. The variable x here works as a parameter: I would like to integrate the said function for each value of x in 0,1,..,44. I have tried Vectorize to no avail. Thanks in advance, jose romero

i'm trying to use the BB package to minimize the sum of the squared deviations for 2 vectors. The only thing am having trouble with is defining the project constraint. I got the upper and lower bounds to work but i am not sure how to create a constraint that the sum of x must be 1. Any help would be greatly appreciated. -- View this message in context:

Hi, I am plotting values of log(hazards ratio) as a function of two predictors, using the plotting function filled.contour(). Here is a simple simulated example of this: x <- seq(0,1, length=20) y <- seq(0,1, length=20) z <- outer(x,y, function(x,y) x^2 + y^2 ) zmat <- matrix( rexp(n=400, rate = z+0.001), 20, 20) filled.contour(x, y, log(zmat),

Hi, I am computing the Nelson-Aalen (NA) estimate of baseline cumulative hazard in two different ways using the "survival" package. I am expecting that they should be identical. However, they are not. Their difference is a monotonically increasing with time. This difference is probably not large to make any impact in the application, but is annoyingly non-trivial for me to just

Dear Martin, I have been playing a lot with the glkerns() function in the "lokern" package for "automatic" smoothing of time-series data. This kernel smoothing approach of Gasser and Mueller seems to perform quite well for estimating the function and its derivatives (first and second derivatives). In fact, this is one of the best methods based on my simulation studies for

I'm solving the differential equation dy/dx = xy-1 with y(0) = sqrt(pi/2). This can be used in computing the tail of the normal distribution. (The actual solution is y(x) = exp(x^2/2) * Integral_x_inf {exp(-t^2/2) dt} = Integral_0_inf {exp (-xt - t^2/2) dt}. For large x, y ~ 1/x, starting around x~2.) I'm testing both lsoda and rk4 from the package odesolve. rk4 is accurate using step

> > >From: robert-mcfadden w o2.pl > > >Date: 2008/04/02 Wed AM 09:58:28 CDT > > >To: r-help w r-project.org > > >Subject: [R] Nonlinear equation > > > > hi: you need to give an example and details or > > you won't get much response, if any. Equation e.g. (A, B are known constants): 3log(gamma(x))-log(gamma(x)*gamma(2x))+(x-1)*A+B=0

Hi All, I would like to compute the simple finite-difference approximation to the gradient of a scalar function of a large number of variables (on the order of 1000). Although a one-time computation using the following function grad() is fast and simple enough, the overhead for repeated evaluation of gradient in iterative schemes is quite significant. I was wondering whether there are