similar to: probl with optimization

Hi, can anyone help me fit betabinomial model to the following dataset where each iD is a cluster in itself , if i use package aod 's betabinom model it gives an estimate of zero to phi(the correlation coeficient ) and if i fix it to the anova type estimate obtained from icc( in package aod) then it says system is exactly singular. And when i try to fit my loglikelihood by

hello I make a subroutine that give-me a (mathematical) function in string format. I would like transform this string into function ( R function ). thanks for any tips. cleber #e.g. fun_String = "-100*x1 + 0*x2 + 100*x3" fun <- function(x1,x2,x3){ return( ############ evaluation( fun_String ) ############ ) True String mathematical function :-( :-( > nomes [1]

When going through my earlier post I find a mistake in the example that I provided. The correct version is provided below. I also start to suspect that my problem is that although the cumulant of a sum of independent variable is the sum of the cumulants, the moments of a sum is not the sum of the moments. But that might not be the only flaw in my application. Regards, Karl-Oskar #An

Dear All, After playing with lmer for couple of days, I have to say that I am amazed! I've been using quite some multilevel/mixed modeling packages, lme4 is a strong candidate for the overall winner, especially for multilevel generzlized linear models. Now go back to my two-level poisson model with cross-classified model. I've been testing various different model specificatios for the

Dear listusers, I don't know whether my problem is statistical or computational, but I hope I could recieve some help in either case. I'm currently working on a MC-simulation in which I would like to control the skewness of a heteroscedastic dependent variable defined as: y=d*z+sqrt(.5+.5*x^2)*e (eq.1) where d is a parameter and, z, x, and e are gamma r.vs. The variables x

Hi, R users, I'm trying to transform a matrix A into B (see below). Anyone knows how to do it in R? Thanks. Matrix A (zone to zone travel time) zone z1 z2 z3 z1 0 2.9 4.3 z2 2.9 0 2.5 z3 4.3 2.5 0 B: from to time z1 z1 0 z1 z2 2.9 z1 z3 4.3 z2 z1 2.9 z2 z2 0 z2 z3 2.5 z3 z1 4.3 z3 z2 2.5 z3 z3 0 The real matrix I have is much larger, with more than 2000 zones. But I think it should

hello, this is my script: #1) read in data: daten<-read.table('K:/Analysen/STRUCTURE/input_STRUCTURE_tab_excl_5_282_559.txt', header=TRUE, sep="\t") daten<-as.matrix(daten) #2) create empty matrix: indxind<-matrix(nrow=617, ncol=617) indxind[1:20,1:19] #3) compare cells to each other, score: for (s in 3:34) { #walks though the matrix colum by colum, starting at

Dear R-group members, I use: platform i386-pc-mingw32 arch x86 os Win32 system x86, Win32 status major 1 minor 4.1 year 2002 month 01 day 30 language R I try to fit a 2 compartment model. The compartments are open, connected to each other and

Dear Rusers, I would like some comments about the following results (under R-2.2.0) > m = matrix(1:6 , 2 , 3) > m [,1] [,2] [,3] [1,] 1 3 5 [2,] 2 4 6 > z1 = m[(m[,1]==2),] > z1 [1] 2 4 6 > is.matrix(z1) [1] FALSE > z2 = m[(m[,1]==0),] > z2 [,1] [,2] [,3] > is.matrix(z2) [1] TRUE Considered together, I'm a bit surprised about

Hello all R-users _question 1_ I need to make a statistical model and respective ANOVA table but I get distinct results for the T-test (in summary(lm.object) function) and the F-test (in anova(lm.object) ) shouldn't this two approach give me the same result, i.e to indicate the same significants terms in both tests??????? obs. The system has two restrictions: 1) sum( x_i ) = 1 2) sum(

Is there an easy way to compare complex numbers? Here is a small example: > (z1=polyroot(c(1,-.4,-.45))) [1] 1.111111-0i -2.000000+0i > (z2=polyroot(c(1,1,.25))) [1] -2+0i -2+0i > x=0 > if(any(identical(z1,z2))) x=99 > x [1] 0 # real and imaginary parts: > Re(z1); Im(z1) [1] 1.111111 -2.000000 [1] -8.4968e-21 8.4968e-21 > Re(z2); Im(z2) [1] -2

Readers, I am trying to use the zoo package with an array of data: file1: hh:mm:ss 1 hh:mm:ss 2 hh:mm:ss 3 hh:mm:ss 4 file2: hh:mm:ss 11 55 hh:mm:ss 22 66 hh:mm:ss 33 77 hh:mm:ss 44 88 I wanted to merge these data set so I tried the following commands: library(chron) library(zoo) z1<-read.zoo("path/to/file1.csv",header=TRUE,sep=",",FUN=times)

I have the joint distribution of three discrete random variables z1, z2 and z3 which is captured by "z" and "prob" as described below. For example, the probability for z1=0.46667, z2=-1 and z3=-1 is 2.752e-13. Also, the probability adds up to 1. > head(z) z1 z2 z3 [1,] -0.46667 -1.0000 -1.0000 [2,] -0.33333 -0.9333 -0.9333 [3,] -0.20000 -0.8667 -0.8667

Dear R-users, I would like to place two 3D plots side-by-side in a rgl-setting. It would nice to have something like "par(mfrow=c(1,2))" for basic plots, or an array framework for wireframe(lattice) (see example below). I only managed to overlap two persp3d plots. My final idea would be to animate both surfaces using play3d(rgl). Thanks in advance for any help. Best, Carlo Giovanni

Hi,   I use fCopulae package to draw different graphs of univariate and bivariate skew t.  But the plots titles overlap.  I tried using cex.main, font.main to adjust the size but they still overlaps.  Here is my code: par(mfrow = c(3, 1)) mu = 0 Omega = 1 alpha1 = 0 alpha2 = 1.5 alpha3 = 2 alpha4 = 0.5 Z1 = matrix(dmvst(x, 1, mu, Omega, alpha1, df = Inf), length(x)) Z2 = matrix(dmvst(x, 1, mu,

Dear All, I have read all the documentation I can find but I still have not understood how, in what context and where to use the action commands enumerated in /usr/share/shorewall/actions.std. Illustrating with SMB traffic for instance, how can one use AllowSMB, DropSMB and RejectSMB to control SMB traffic instead of the classic ACCEPT z1 z2 udp 135,445 ACCEPT z1

Dear all, I am interested in solving a MIP problem with binary outcomes and continuous variables, which ARE NOT RESTRICTED TO BE NEGATIVE. In particular, Max {z1,z2,z3,b1} z1 + z2 + z3 (s.t.) # 7 z1 + 0 z2 + 0 z3 + b1 <= 5 # 0 z1 + 8 z2 + 0 z3 - b1 <= 5 # 0 z1 + 0 z2 + 6 z3 + b1 <= 7 # z1, z2, z3 BINARY {0,1} # -5<= b1 <=5 (i.e. b1 <= 5; -b1 <= 5 ) Using

Most likely, previous computations have ended up giving slightly different values of say 0.13333. A pragmatic way out is to round to, say, 5 digits before applying unique. In this particular case, it seems like all numbers are multiples of 1/30, so another idea could be to multiply by 30, round, and divide by 30. -pd > On 28 Jul 2017, at 17:17 , li li <hannah.hlx at gmail.com> wrote:

Hello, I have difficulties to deal with multilevel model. My dataset is composed of 10910 observations, 1237 plants nested within 17 stations. The data set is not balanced. Response variable is binary and repeated. I tried to fit this model model<- glmmPQL( y ~ z1.lon*lun + z2.lat*lun + z1.lon*lar + z2.lat*lar + z1.lon*sca + z2.lat*sca +z1.lon*eta + z2.lat*eta, random = ~ lun + lar + sca

Hello, I used the following codes to generate bivariate normal dependence structure with unit Frechet margins. Sigma <- matrix(c(1,.5*sqrt(1),.5*sqrt(1),1),2,2) # generate y <- mvrnorm(Nsam, c(0,0), Sigma) # random v <- cbind(pnorm(y[,1],mean = 0, sd = 1), pnorm(y[,2],mean = 0, sd = 1)) z <- cbind(-1/log(v[,1]),-1/log(v[,2])) z1 <- z[,1] z2 <- z[,2] And to