> From: Ross Darnell
>
> Liaw, Andy wrote:
> >>From: Liaw, Andy
> >>
> >>
> >>>From: Ross Darnell
> >>>
> >>>A good point but what is the value of storing a large set of
> >>>predicted
> >>>values when the values of the explanatory variables are lost
> >>>(predicted
> >>>values of what?). I thought the purpose of objects was that
> >>
> >>they were
> >>
> >>>self explanatory (pardon the pun).
> >>>
> >>>Maybe we could make it optional.
> >>
> >>If what you are looking for is a way to track the
> >>observations, I'd suggest
> >>simply adding rownames of newdata as names of the predicted
> >>values. Storing
> >>names is much cheaper than the entire data frame of
> >>predictors. (And in R,
> >>data frames _must_ have unique row names.)
> >
> >
> > And as a matter of fact, predict.lm() and predict.glm()
> > (and probably most other predict() methods) already do
> > that.
> >
> > Andy
> >
> >
> >>Cheers,
> >>Andy
> >>
> >>
> >>>Ross Darnell
> >>>--
> >>>Email: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >>>
> Hi Andy
>
> Where?
>
> Try predict.glm example
> ## example from Venables and Ripley (2002, pp. 190-2.)
> ldose <- rep(0:5, 2)
> numdead <- c(1, 4, 9, 13, 18, 20, 0, 2, 6, 10, 12, 16)
> sex <- factor(rep(c("M", "F"), c(6, 6)))
> SF <- cbind(numdead, numalive=20-numdead)
> budworm.lg <- glm(SF ~ sex*ldose, family=binomial)
> ld <- seq(0, 5, 0.1)
> row.names(predict(budworm.lg, data.frame(ldose=ld,
> sex=factor(rep("M", length(ld)), levels=levels(sex))),
> type = "response"))
[You'd want names() rather than row.names(), since predict()
in this case returns a vector.]
I don't know if this is intended (and if it is, I don't
understand why): the names are missing only for
type="response". For the other types, the names are
there. The problem seems to be the order of arguments
in pmin() inside make.link():
eta <- pmin(thresh, pmax(eta, -thresh))
which should probably be:
eta <- pmin(pmax(eta, -thresh), thresh)
This is because pmin/pmax preserve the names of it's first
argument, not the second.
There are quite a few other places in make.link() like
this. Question to R Core: Would such fixes be considered
`trivial' enough to make it into R-2.1.0?
Andy
> I'm using
>
> > version
> _
> platform i386-pc-mingw32
> arch i386
> os mingw32
> system i386, mingw32
> status
> major 2
> minor 0.1
> year 2004
> month 11
> day 15
> language R
> >
>
> What have I done wrong? I didn't send this to the R list to avoid
> embarrassing myself.
>
> Cheers
>
> Ross Darnell
> --
> Email: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>
>
______________________________________________
R-devel@stat.math.ethz.ch mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
