similar to: Strange seq() behavior

Hi, I'm trying to randomize a sequence of trials for an experimental design. The trials consist of values for each of two factors. As is there are 30 combinations of the two factors, and I want them to be ordered randomly but with the requirement that for one of the factors, the value can never be the same as the previous value. I'm currently randomizing my dataframe by using:

Hi, I often use plotmeans() from the gplots package to quickly visualize a pattern of change. I would like to be able to plot separate lines for different groups, but the function gives an error when a grouping variable is included in the formula argument. For instance, > require(gplots) > x <- data.frame(Score=rnorm(100), Time=rep(1:10, 10),

Hi, I want to add error bars to a plot generated with xyplot. I've tried both errbar() and plotCI(), but in both cases the points are not in the same place. It's as if the two functions are using a different frame of reference for the plotting area. for example: means <- c(92.5, 92.25, 90.9, 91.0, 94.15, 90.05) #means time <- c(1,1,2,2,3,3) #occasion variable group <-

Hi, There is an object, ".Last.value" to which the result of the most recent evaluation is assigned. This is similar to "ans" in Matlab. In Matlab "ans" can be very useful and time-saving, but typing the larger R version is somewhat clunky and takes away from the usefulness. Is it possible to reassign '.Last.value' to something simpler, like

Hi, I've looked all over for a solution to this, but haven't had much look in specifying what I want to do with appropriate search terms. Thus I'm turning to R-help. In the process of trying to write a simple function to rename individual column names in a data frame, I ran into the following problem: When I rename the columns within my function, I can't seem to get it to

Hello, I am confused about the order of nesting in mixed models using functions like aov(), lme(), lmer(). I have the following data: n subjects in either condition A or B each subject tested at each of 3 numerical values ("distance" = 40,50,60), repeated 4 times for each of the 3 numerical values ("trial" = 1,2,3,4) Variable summary: Condition: 2 level factor Distance:

Hi, I've done my best to search for a solution to this, but had no luck. How can I create a lattice plot (I'm using xyplot() ) that does not have a border on the top and right side, but keeps the bottom/left axes? So far all I've found is this, which inserted into the xyplot call removes all 4 borders: / par.settings = list(axis.line = list(col = 0))/ xyplot( Sepal.Length ~

Hello, I make frequent use of the *step()* and, for plotting, *all.effects() *functions for *lm()* objects. I am now doing more with *lme()* random effects models, and haven't been able to find functions similar to *step()* or *all.effects()* which will accept *lme()* objects. Do similar functions for either exist? If someone could point me in the right direction it would be much

Hi, I'm having some problems with the aggregate() function in the {stats} package, and the documentation doesn't address them. 1) Why would the first line work, but the second not? According to the help file, it accepts a "data=" argument. > with(tsrc, aggregate(x=DistRatio, by=list(Condition), FUN=mean)) Group.1 x 1 Congruent 1.741789 2 Mismatch 1.771425

Do you heve any idea why I get after this instruction everywhere false? > seq (0, 1, by=0.1) == 0.3 [1] FALSE FALSE FALSE FALSE FALSE FALSE FALSE FALSE FALSE FALSE FALSE But after different step it's ok: > seq(0, 1, by=0.1) == 0.4 [1] FALSE FALSE FALSE FALSE TRUE FALSE FALSE FALSE FALSE FALSE FALSE -- View this message in context:

(I use R 2.9.1 with win XP) If I run this code: seq(-0.1,.9, by = .05)[seq(-0.1,.9, by = .05) <= 0.5] I get this output: [1] -0.10 -0.05 0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30 0.35 0.40 0.45 Why is 0.50 not in the results ? (It seems that it gives a slightly bigger number then 0.5 but I don't understand why it does that) Where as if I try: seq(-0.1,.9, by = .05)[seq(-0.1,.9, by = .05) <=

Hi all, Is there any problem of precision when using seq?. For example: x<- seq(0,4,0.1) x[4]=0.3 BUT: x[4]-0.3=5.551115e-17 It means when I use this condition within an if clause, it does not find values with 0.3 for x[4] as it is not precisely 0.3. Is there any bug in seq() ? -- View this message in context: http://r.789695.n4.nabble.com/Inconsistency-using-seq-tp4633739.html Sent from

Hi, Today I was flabbergasted to see something that looks like a rounding error in the very basic seq function in R. > a = seq(0.1,0.9,by=0.1) > a [1] 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 > a[1] == 0.1 [1] TRUE > a[2] == 0.2 [1] TRUE > a[3] == 0.3 [1] FALSE It turns out that the alternative > a = (1:9)/10 works just fine. Are there any good guides out there on how to deal

Full_Name: Johannes Prix Version: 2.1.1 OS: WinXP, SuSE Linux Submission from: (NULL) (137.208.41.195) The seq-command produces unnescessary inaccurate results, which can be extremely annoying. I absolutely do not see the nescessity of numerical garbage to appear in the following simple case. E.g. try this: > seq ( 61.55 , 62.00 , by=0.01 ) - round ( seq ( 61.55 , 62.00 , by=0.01 ) ,

Hi, there, I cannot get accurate value for calculation. for example: ld<-sqrt(1*0.05*0.95*0.05*0.95) 0.05*0.95-ld=-6.938894e-18 0.05*0.95-ld==0 is False. I met this problem in my program, how can I handle it. Thanks. xj.

Full_Name: jan hattendorf Version: 2.9.0 OS: XP Submission from: (NULL) (213.3.108.185) I get an incorrect result for (41/10-1/10)%%1 [1] 1 The error did not occur with other numbers than 41 (1, 11, 21, 31, 51, ...) test <- rep(NA, 1000) for(i in 1:1000){ test[i] <- i/10-1/10 } test[test%%1==0]

Hi, I'm having trouble with the "which" or the "seq" function, I'm not sure. Here's an example : > lat=seq(1,2,by=0.1) > lat [1] 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.8 1.9 2.0 > which(lat==1) [1] 1 > which(lat==1.1) [1] 2 > which(lat==1.2) [1] 3 > which(lat==1.3) [1] 4 > which(lat==1.4) [1] 5 > which(lat==1.5) [1] 6 >

Dear colleagues Please could someone kindly explain the following inconsistencies I've discovered when performing logical calculations in R: 8.8 - 7.8 > 1 > TRUE 8.3 - 7.3 > 1 > TRUE Thank you, Emma Jane [[alternative HTML version deleted]]

Hi all, please see my code: > library(zoo) > a <- as.yearmon("March-2010", "%B-%Y") > b <- as.yearmon("May-2010", "%B-%Y") > > nn <- (b-a)*12 # number of months in between them > nn [1] 2 > as.integer(nn) [1] 1 What is the correct way to find the number of months between "a" and "b", still

Hi, I'm using the '%%' operator in some code, and am running into the following erroneous outcome: > 1.2 %% 0.2 [1] 0.2 Unless I'm very mistaken, the result should be 0 (indeed, 12 %% 2 does result in 0). Furthermore: > 1.20000000000000001 %% 0.2 [1] 0.2 > (1.2+1e17) %% .2 [1] 0 Warning message: probable complete loss of accuracy in modulus (Warning