similar to: where did the factor name go

Dear all, I am a relative novice with R, so please forgive any terrible errors... I am working with a GLM that describes a response variable as a function of a categorical variable with three levels and a continuous variable. These two predictor variables are believed to interact. An example of such a model follows at the bottom of this message, but here is a section of its summary table:

Hi all, I wrote a r program as below: x <- 1:10 y <- c(3,3,3,3,3,3,3,3,3,3) fit <- lm(log(y) ~ x) summary(fit) And I expect to get some error message from R, because "y" is constant. But, I got the message as below: > summary(fit) Call: lm(formula = log(y) ~ x) Residuals: Min 1Q Median 3Q Max -6.802e-17 -3.933e-17 -1.063e-17 1.807e-17

Hi Everyone, I just don't know how to extract the information I want from the summary of a linear regression model fitting. For example, I fit the following simple linear regression model: results = lm(y_var ~ x_var) summary(results) gives me: Call: lm(formula = y_var ~ x_var) Residuals: Min 1Q Median 3Q Max -5.9859 -1.5849 0.4574 2.0163 4.6015 Coefficients:

I was surprised to find that just changing the base level of a factor variable changed the number of significant coefficients in the solution. I was surprised at this and want to know how I should choose the order of the factors, if the order affects the result. Here is the small example. It is taken from 'The R Book', Crawley p. 365. The data is at

Hello, I am running Kruskal-Walis test in R. When I try to save results using write.table it gives me the following error : Error in as.data.frame.default(x[[i]], optional = TRUE, stringsAsFactors = stringsAsFactors) : cannot coerce class "htest" into a data.frame The overall code is as follows : >data_file = read.table("~/DATA.dir/data_file.txt", header=T)

Hi there, I'm quite new to R (and statistics), and I like it (both)! But I'm a bit lost in all these packages, so could someone please give me a hint whether there exists a package for fitting exponential curves (of the type t --> \sum_i a_i \exp( - b_i t)) on a noisy signal? In fact monoexponential decay + polynomial growth is what I'd like to try. Thanks in advance,

Dear all, I get an error message when I use polr() in MASS. These are my data: skugg grupp frekv 4 1 gr3 0 5 2 gr3 3 6 3 gr3 6 10 1 gr5 1 11 2 gr5 12 12 3 gr5 1 > > summary(polr(skugg ~ grupp, weights=frekv, data= skugg.cpy1.dat)) Error in optim(start, fmin, gmin, method = "BFGS", hessian = Hess, ...) :

Hi list, I have a problem which I was stuck on for a while, and after many days still cannot find a solution to. I have a matrix, measuring m X n. An example matrix will be this: >dput(sample) structure(c(2315101, 2315102, 2315103, 2315104, 2315105, 2315107, 2315108, 2315110, 2315112, 2315114, 2315116, 2315118, 2315120, 2315122, 2315124, 2315126, 2315127, 2315128, 2315130, 2315131, 2315132,

Hello, I am performing a BACI analysis with ANOVA using the following glm: fit1<-glm(log(Cucs_m+1)~(BA*Otter)+BA+Otter+ID+Primary, data=b1) The summary(aov(fit1)) shows significance in the interaction; however, now I would like to determine what combinations of BA and Otter are significantly different (each factor has two levels). ID and PRIMARY substrates are categorical and included in

Hello dear R members. I have been learning the Anova syntax in order to perform an SS type III Anova with repeated measures designs (thank you Prof. John Fox!) And another question came up: where/what are the (between/within) residuals for my model? ############ Play code: phase <- factor(rep(c("pretest", "posttest", "followup"), c(5, 5, 5)),

Hi, I'm trying to do a multiple events model using coxph. I need to choose which covariates stay in the final model and i'm using anova but it seems that it doesn't work with robust variances as a error message appears when I try to do it: /PWPfit<-coxph(Surv(ini,fim,status)~Sexo+Transmissao+Regime+HAART+Drogas+Psi+ + CD4+CV+Neo+IO+cluster(idPARTICIPANTE)+strata(Estrato),data=PWP)

I know this is something simple that I cannot do because I do not yet "think" in R. I have a data frame has a variable participation (a factor), and several other factors. I want a chisq test (no contingency tables) for participation vs all of the other factors. In SPSS I would do: CROSSTABS /TABLES= (my other factors) BY participation /FORMAT=NOTABLES /STATISTICS=CHISQ

Hi everyone, I have carried out a multiple imputation in R using Amelia II and have created 5 multiply imputed datasets. The purpose of my research is to fit a Poisson Model to the data to estimate numbers of hospital admissions. Now that I have 5 completed datasets and I have to pool all the 5 datasets to get one combined output for a poisson model. I have checked previous queries about

Dear R users: When I create a table without Major Column headings, my *regular* column headings appear correct in the typeset latex file. The major row heading and row groups are as they should. w <- latex(mytab,title="",file="tab/my.tex",ctable=TRUE,caption="Descriptive statistics by

The "genetics" package for handling single-locus genetic data is now available on CRAN in both source and Windows binary formats. The purpose of this package is to make it easy to create and manipulate genetic information, and to facility use of this information in statistical models. The library includes classes and methods for creating, representing, and manipulating genotypes

The "genetics" package for handling single-locus genetic data is now available on CRAN in both source and Windows binary formats. The purpose of this package is to make it easy to create and manipulate genetic information, and to facility use of this information in statistical models. The library includes classes and methods for creating, representing, and manipulating genotypes

On 23.11.2012, at 15:12, john skaller <skaller at users.sourceforge.net> wrote: > > On 23/11/2012, at 5:46 PM, Sean Silva wrote: > >> Adding LLVMdev, since this is intimately related to the optimization passes. >> >>> I think this is roughly because some function level optimisations are >>> worse than O(N) in the number of instructions. >>

Dear Community, I have been using two types of survival programs to analyse a data set. The first one is an R function called aftreg. The second one an STATA function called streg. Both of them include the same analyisis with a weibull distribution. Yet, results are very different. Shouldn't the results be the same? Kind regards, J -- View this message in context: