On Thu, 02 May 2013 22:04:26 +0200, peter dalgaard <pda...@gmail.com>
wrote:
On May 2, 2013, at 20:33 , Lorenzo Isella wrote:
On Wed, 01 May 2013 23:49:07 +0200, peter dalgaard <pda...@gmail.com>
wrote:
It still doesn't work!!!!!
Apologies; since I had already imported nnet in my workspace, the
script worked on my machine even without importing it explicitly (see
the script at the end of the email).
Sorry for the confusion.
You still owe us an answer why you thought that this:
Coefficients:
(Intercept) science socst femalefemale
low 1.912288 -0.02356494 -0.03892428 0.81659717
high -4.057284 0.02292179 0.04300323 -0.03287211
Std. Errors:
(Intercept) science socst femalefemale
low 1.127255 0.02097468 0.01951649 0.3909804
high 1.222937 0.02087182 0.01988933 0.3500151
Residual Deviance: 388.0697
is at all different from the Stata output. As far as I can tell it is
EXACTLY the same!
Apologies for being insistent, but this will come up in Internet
searches as "I couldn't make R do what Stata does".
You are right. I must have messed up my workspace...
In any case, the idea that R is somehow inferior to stata never crossed my
mind.
Rather, I was puzzled because I (not R) could not reproduce an allegedly
almost textbook-like example I found on the web.
Many thanks for your help.
Lorenzo
______________________________________________
R-help@r-project.org mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help
PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html
and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.
