Re: [R] "XLConnect" packages; Excel dates read incorrectly

2017-09-23 Thread John 
Hi,

   Thank you for all your responses.
   For Eric, The files are attached. (I believe it was also attached in my
first message)
   For David, Could you send me the link regarding possible solutions or a
more comprehensive description of the problem?

   Thanks,

John


2017-09-23 22:29 GMT-07:00 David Winsemius :

>
> > On Sep 23, 2017, at 6:30 AM, Eric Berger  wrote:
> >
> > Jim,
> > I don't see how that link could be related to John's issue. Symptoms
> > related to your link involve discrepancies of four years whereas John is
> > seeing discrepancies of one day.
> >
>
> The MS Excel starting point was off by one day. R does not repeat that
> error. MS claims that their  error is justified by needing to copy the
> error made by Lotus123 and then because they wanted backward compatibility.
>
> I'm not sure why the XLConnect package does not fix the error. They just
> use the integer from Excel and let R apply it correctly.
> --
> David.
>
>
> > John,
> > I do not see any attached files.
> >
> > Regards
> >
> > On Sat, Sep 23, 2017 at 1:30 PM, Jim Lemon  wrote:
> >
> >> Hi John,
> >> It could be due to this:
> >>
> >> https://support.microsoft.com/en-au/help/214330/differences-
> >> between-the-1900-and-the-1904-date-system-in-excel
> >>
> >> Jim
> >>
> >>
> >> On Sat, Sep 23, 2017 at 1:04 PM, John  wrote:
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>>   I tried to read xlsx files by "XLConnect" packages, but the dates are
> >>> one day earlier than it is supposed to be. I moved from California to
> >>> Taiwan (Eastern Asia), and it worked well in California, but not in
> >> Taiwan.
> >>> Even if I adjust my Mac time to California time zone, it gives the
> wrong
> >>> dates. I don't know which part of the setting (in RStudio or in my
> Mac?)
> >> I
> >>> should adjust. The codes and the data are attached.
> >>>
> >>>   My data are on weekdays, Monday to Friday every week, but they are
> >> read
> >>> as Sunday to Thursday.
> >>>
> >>> Data:
> >>> 2004-01-01 (Th)
> >>> 2004-01-02 (F)
> >>> 2004-01-05 (M)
> >>> 2004-01-06 (T)
> >>> 2004-01-07 (W)
> >>> 2004-01-08 (Th)
> >>> 2004-01-09 (F)
> >>>
> >>> The data are read as:
> >>> "2003-12-31" (W)
> >>> "2004-01-01" (Th)
> >>> "2004-01-04" (Su)
> >>> "2004-01-05" (M)
> >>> "2004-01-06" (Tu)
> >>> "2004-01-07" (W)
> >>> "2004-01-08" (Th)
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> The codes are (also attached):
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> rm(list=ls())
> >>> library(XLConnect)
> >>> library(xlsx)
> >>>
> >>> fl<-paste("allData_out3.xlsx")
> >>> a1<-readWorksheetFromFile(fl, sheet="first", colTypes="numeric")
> >>> b1<-readWorksheetFromFile(fl, sheet="second", colTypes="numeric")
> >>> a_col<-readWorksheetFromFile(fl, sheet="first")
> >>> date11<-as.Date(a_col$date, format="%Y-%m-%d")
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> The output:
>  date11
> >>> [1] "2003-12-31" "2004-01-01" "2004-01-04" "2004-01-05" "2004-01-06"
> >>> "2004-01-07"
> >>> [7] "2004-01-08" "2004-01-11" "2004-01-12" "2004-01-13" "2004-01-14"
> >>> "2004-01-15"
> >>> [13] "2004-01-18" "2004-01-19" "2004-01-20" "2004-01-21" "2004-01-22"
> >>> "2004-01-25"
> >>> [19] "2004-01-26" "2004-01-27" "2004-01-28" "2004-01-29" "2004-02-01"
> 
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Thanks!!
> >>> __
> >>> R-help@r-project.org mailing list -- To UNSUBSCRIBE and more, see
> >>> 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.
> >>
> >> __
> >> R-help@r-project.org mailing list -- To UNSUBSCRIBE and more, see
> >> 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.
> >>
> >
> >   [[alternative HTML version deleted]]
> >
> > __
> > R-help@r-project.org mailing list -- To UNSUBSCRIBE and more, see
> > 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.
>
> David Winsemius
> Alameda, CA, USA
>
> 'Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced.'
>  -Gehm's Corollary to Clarke's Third Law
>
> __
> R-help@r-project.org mailing list -- To UNSUBSCRIBE and more, see
> 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.
>
__
R-help@r-project.org mailing list -- To UNSUBSCRIBE and more, see
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help
PLEASE do read the posting guide

Re: [R] gsDesign Pocock & OBF boundary

2017-09-23 Thread array chip via R-help 
Sorry for messed up text. Here it goes again:
I am learning to use the gsDesign package.
I have a question about Pocock and OBF boundary. As far as I can understand, 
these 2 boundaries require equal spacing between interim analyses (maybe this 
is not correct?). But looks like I can still use gsDesign to run an analysis 
based on unequal spacing: 
> gsDesign(k=2,test.type=2,timing=c(0.75,1),alpha=0.05,sfu='Pocock')
Symmetric two-sided group sequential design with 90 %power and 5 % Type I 
Error.Spending computations assume trial stops if a bound is crossed.          
Sample          Size  Analysis Ratio*  Z  Nominal p  Spend        1  0.796 1.82 
   0.0346 0.0346        2  1.061 1.82    0.0346 0.0154    Total                 
     0.0500 ++alpha spending: Pocock boundary.*Sample size ratio compared to 
fixed design with no interim 
Can anyone share some light whether the above analysis is still valid? Or for 
unequal spacing, I have to use Lan-Demet’s error spending function 
approximations? Thank you,



  From: Berend Hasselman 
 To: array chip  
Cc: R-help Mailing List 
 Sent: Friday, September 22, 2017 11:46 PM
 Subject: Re: [R] gsDesign Pocock & OBF boundary
   

> On 23 Sep 2017, at 01:32, array chip via R-help  wrote:
> 
> Hi, 
> 
> I am learning to use your gsDesign package! I have a question about Pocock 
> and OBF boundary. As far as Iunderstand, these 2 boundaries require equal 
> spacing between interim analyses(maybe this is not correct?). But I can still 
> use gsDesign to run an analysisbased on unequal spacing: 
> gsDesign(k=2,test.type=2,timing=c(0.75,1),alpha=0.05,sfu='Pocock')Symmetrictwo-sided
>  group sequential design with90 %power and 5 % Type I 
> Error.Spendingcomputations assume trial stops if a bound is crossed.          
> Sample          Size  AnalysisRatio*  Z  Nominal p  Spend        1  0.796 
> 1.82    0.0346 0.0346        2  1.061 1.82    0.0346 0.0154    Total          
>             0.0500  ++alpha spending:Pocockboundary.*Sample size ratio 
> compared to fixed design with no interim Can anyone share some light whether 
> the above analysis is stillvalid? Or for unequal spacing, I have to use 
> Lan-Demet’s error spendingfunction approximations? Thank you,
>     [[alternative HTML version deleted]]
> 

Your example code is a complete mess.
Do NOT post in html. This is a plain text mailing list.
Read the Posting Guide (https://www.r-project.org/posting-guide.html).

Berend Hasselman]

> __
> R-help@r-project.org mailing list -- To UNSUBSCRIBE and more, see
> 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.


   
[[alternative HTML version deleted]]

__
R-help@r-project.org mailing list -- To UNSUBSCRIBE and more, see
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.

Re: [R] "XLConnect" packages; Excel dates read incorrectly

2017-09-23 Thread David Winsemius 

> On Sep 23, 2017, at 6:30 AM, Eric Berger  wrote:
> 
> Jim,
> I don't see how that link could be related to John's issue. Symptoms
> related to your link involve discrepancies of four years whereas John is
> seeing discrepancies of one day.
> 

The MS Excel starting point was off by one day. R does not repeat that error. 
MS claims that their  error is justified by needing to copy the error made by 
Lotus123 and then because they wanted backward compatibility.

I'm not sure why the XLConnect package does not fix the error. They just use 
the integer from Excel and let R apply it correctly.
-- 
David.


> John,
> I do not see any attached files.
> 
> Regards
> 
> On Sat, Sep 23, 2017 at 1:30 PM, Jim Lemon  wrote:
> 
>> Hi John,
>> It could be due to this:
>> 
>> https://support.microsoft.com/en-au/help/214330/differences-
>> between-the-1900-and-the-1904-date-system-in-excel
>> 
>> Jim
>> 
>> 
>> On Sat, Sep 23, 2017 at 1:04 PM, John  wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>> 
>>>   I tried to read xlsx files by "XLConnect" packages, but the dates are
>>> one day earlier than it is supposed to be. I moved from California to
>>> Taiwan (Eastern Asia), and it worked well in California, but not in
>> Taiwan.
>>> Even if I adjust my Mac time to California time zone, it gives the wrong
>>> dates. I don't know which part of the setting (in RStudio or in my Mac?)
>> I
>>> should adjust. The codes and the data are attached.
>>> 
>>>   My data are on weekdays, Monday to Friday every week, but they are
>> read
>>> as Sunday to Thursday.
>>> 
>>> Data:
>>> 2004-01-01 (Th)
>>> 2004-01-02 (F)
>>> 2004-01-05 (M)
>>> 2004-01-06 (T)
>>> 2004-01-07 (W)
>>> 2004-01-08 (Th)
>>> 2004-01-09 (F)
>>> 
>>> The data are read as:
>>> "2003-12-31" (W)
>>> "2004-01-01" (Th)
>>> "2004-01-04" (Su)
>>> "2004-01-05" (M)
>>> "2004-01-06" (Tu)
>>> "2004-01-07" (W)
>>> "2004-01-08" (Th)
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> The codes are (also attached):
>>> 
>>> 
>>> rm(list=ls())
>>> library(XLConnect)
>>> library(xlsx)
>>> 
>>> fl<-paste("allData_out3.xlsx")
>>> a1<-readWorksheetFromFile(fl, sheet="first", colTypes="numeric")
>>> b1<-readWorksheetFromFile(fl, sheet="second", colTypes="numeric")
>>> a_col<-readWorksheetFromFile(fl, sheet="first")
>>> date11<-as.Date(a_col$date, format="%Y-%m-%d")
>>> 
>>> 
>>> The output:
 date11
>>> [1] "2003-12-31" "2004-01-01" "2004-01-04" "2004-01-05" "2004-01-06"
>>> "2004-01-07"
>>> [7] "2004-01-08" "2004-01-11" "2004-01-12" "2004-01-13" "2004-01-14"
>>> "2004-01-15"
>>> [13] "2004-01-18" "2004-01-19" "2004-01-20" "2004-01-21" "2004-01-22"
>>> "2004-01-25"
>>> [19] "2004-01-26" "2004-01-27" "2004-01-28" "2004-01-29" "2004-02-01"
 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Thanks!!
>>> __
>>> R-help@r-project.org mailing list -- To UNSUBSCRIBE and more, see
>>> 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.
>> 
>> __
>> R-help@r-project.org mailing list -- To UNSUBSCRIBE and more, see
>> 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.
>> 
> 
>   [[alternative HTML version deleted]]
> 
> __
> R-help@r-project.org mailing list -- To UNSUBSCRIBE and more, see
> 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.

David Winsemius
Alameda, CA, USA

'Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced.'   
-Gehm's Corollary to Clarke's Third Law

__
R-help@r-project.org mailing list -- To UNSUBSCRIBE and more, see
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.

Re: [R] "XLConnect" packages; Excel dates read incorrectly

2017-09-23 Thread Eric Berger 
Jim,
I don't see how that link could be related to John's issue. Symptoms
related to your link involve discrepancies of four years whereas John is
seeing discrepancies of one day.

John,
I do not see any attached files.

Regards

On Sat, Sep 23, 2017 at 1:30 PM, Jim Lemon  wrote:

> Hi John,
> It could be due to this:
>
> https://support.microsoft.com/en-au/help/214330/differences-
> between-the-1900-and-the-1904-date-system-in-excel
>
> Jim
>
>
> On Sat, Sep 23, 2017 at 1:04 PM, John  wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> >I tried to read xlsx files by "XLConnect" packages, but the dates are
> > one day earlier than it is supposed to be. I moved from California to
> > Taiwan (Eastern Asia), and it worked well in California, but not in
> Taiwan.
> > Even if I adjust my Mac time to California time zone, it gives the wrong
> > dates. I don't know which part of the setting (in RStudio or in my Mac?)
> I
> > should adjust. The codes and the data are attached.
> >
> >My data are on weekdays, Monday to Friday every week, but they are
> read
> > as Sunday to Thursday.
> >
> > Data:
> > 2004-01-01 (Th)
> > 2004-01-02 (F)
> > 2004-01-05 (M)
> > 2004-01-06 (T)
> > 2004-01-07 (W)
> > 2004-01-08 (Th)
> > 2004-01-09 (F)
> >
> > The data are read as:
> > "2003-12-31" (W)
> > "2004-01-01" (Th)
> > "2004-01-04" (Su)
> > "2004-01-05" (M)
> > "2004-01-06" (Tu)
> > "2004-01-07" (W)
> >  "2004-01-08" (Th)
> >
> >
> >
> > The codes are (also attached):
> >
> >
> > rm(list=ls())
> > library(XLConnect)
> > library(xlsx)
> >
> > fl<-paste("allData_out3.xlsx")
> > a1<-readWorksheetFromFile(fl, sheet="first", colTypes="numeric")
> > b1<-readWorksheetFromFile(fl, sheet="second", colTypes="numeric")
> > a_col<-readWorksheetFromFile(fl, sheet="first")
> > date11<-as.Date(a_col$date, format="%Y-%m-%d")
> >
> >
> > The output:
> >> date11
> >  [1] "2003-12-31" "2004-01-01" "2004-01-04" "2004-01-05" "2004-01-06"
> > "2004-01-07"
> >  [7] "2004-01-08" "2004-01-11" "2004-01-12" "2004-01-13" "2004-01-14"
> > "2004-01-15"
> > [13] "2004-01-18" "2004-01-19" "2004-01-20" "2004-01-21" "2004-01-22"
> > "2004-01-25"
> > [19] "2004-01-26" "2004-01-27" "2004-01-28" "2004-01-29" "2004-02-01"
> >>
> >
> >
> > Thanks!!
> > __
> > R-help@r-project.org mailing list -- To UNSUBSCRIBE and more, see
> > 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.
>
> __
> R-help@r-project.org mailing list -- To UNSUBSCRIBE and more, see
> 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.
>

[[alternative HTML version deleted]]

__
R-help@r-project.org mailing list -- To UNSUBSCRIBE and more, see
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.

Re: [R] "XLConnect" packages; Excel dates read incorrectly

2017-09-23 Thread Jim Lemon 
Hi John,
It could be due to this:

https://support.microsoft.com/en-au/help/214330/differences-between-the-1900-and-the-1904-date-system-in-excel

Jim


On Sat, Sep 23, 2017 at 1:04 PM, John  wrote:
> Hi,
>
>I tried to read xlsx files by "XLConnect" packages, but the dates are
> one day earlier than it is supposed to be. I moved from California to
> Taiwan (Eastern Asia), and it worked well in California, but not in Taiwan.
> Even if I adjust my Mac time to California time zone, it gives the wrong
> dates. I don't know which part of the setting (in RStudio or in my Mac?) I
> should adjust. The codes and the data are attached.
>
>My data are on weekdays, Monday to Friday every week, but they are read
> as Sunday to Thursday.
>
> Data:
> 2004-01-01 (Th)
> 2004-01-02 (F)
> 2004-01-05 (M)
> 2004-01-06 (T)
> 2004-01-07 (W)
> 2004-01-08 (Th)
> 2004-01-09 (F)
>
> The data are read as:
> "2003-12-31" (W)
> "2004-01-01" (Th)
> "2004-01-04" (Su)
> "2004-01-05" (M)
> "2004-01-06" (Tu)
> "2004-01-07" (W)
>  "2004-01-08" (Th)
>
>
>
> The codes are (also attached):
>
>
> rm(list=ls())
> library(XLConnect)
> library(xlsx)
>
> fl<-paste("allData_out3.xlsx")
> a1<-readWorksheetFromFile(fl, sheet="first", colTypes="numeric")
> b1<-readWorksheetFromFile(fl, sheet="second", colTypes="numeric")
> a_col<-readWorksheetFromFile(fl, sheet="first")
> date11<-as.Date(a_col$date, format="%Y-%m-%d")
>
>
> The output:
>> date11
>  [1] "2003-12-31" "2004-01-01" "2004-01-04" "2004-01-05" "2004-01-06"
> "2004-01-07"
>  [7] "2004-01-08" "2004-01-11" "2004-01-12" "2004-01-13" "2004-01-14"
> "2004-01-15"
> [13] "2004-01-18" "2004-01-19" "2004-01-20" "2004-01-21" "2004-01-22"
> "2004-01-25"
> [19] "2004-01-26" "2004-01-27" "2004-01-28" "2004-01-29" "2004-02-01"
>>
>
>
> Thanks!!
> __
> R-help@r-project.org mailing list -- To UNSUBSCRIBE and more, see
> 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.

__
R-help@r-project.org mailing list -- To UNSUBSCRIBE and more, see
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.

Re: [R] gsDesign Pocock & OBF boundary

2017-09-23 Thread Berend Hasselman 

> On 23 Sep 2017, at 01:32, array chip via R-help  wrote:
> 
> Hi, 
> 
> I am learning to use your gsDesign package! I have a question about Pocock 
> and OBF boundary. As far as Iunderstand, these 2 boundaries require equal 
> spacing between interim analyses(maybe this is not correct?). But I can still 
> use gsDesign to run an analysisbased on unequal spacing: 
> gsDesign(k=2,test.type=2,timing=c(0.75,1),alpha=0.05,sfu='Pocock')Symmetrictwo-sided
>  group sequential design with90 %power and 5 % Type I 
> Error.Spendingcomputations assume trial stops if a bound is crossed.  
>  Sample   Size   AnalysisRatio*  Z   Nominal p  Spend1  0.796 
> 1.820.0346 0.03462  1.061 1.820.0346 0.0154Total  
> 0.0500  ++alpha spending:Pocockboundary.*Sample size ratio 
> compared to fixed design with no interim Can anyone share some light whether 
> the above analysis is stillvalid? Or for unequal spacing, I have to use 
> Lan-Demet’s error spendingfunction approximations? Thank you,
>   [[alternative HTML version deleted]]
> 

Your example code is a complete mess.
Do NOT post in html. This is a plain text mailing list.
Read the Posting Guide (https://www.r-project.org/posting-guide.html).

Berend Hasselman]

> __
> R-help@r-project.org mailing list -- To UNSUBSCRIBE and more, see
> 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.

__
R-help@r-project.org mailing list -- To UNSUBSCRIBE and more, see
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.

[R] gsDesign Pocock & OBF boundary

2017-09-23 Thread array chip via R-help 
Hi, 

I am learning to use your gsDesign package! I have a question about Pocock and 
OBF boundary. As far as Iunderstand, these 2 boundaries require equal spacing 
between interim analyses(maybe this is not correct?). But I can still use 
gsDesign to run an analysisbased on unequal spacing: 
gsDesign(k=2,test.type=2,timing=c(0.75,1),alpha=0.05,sfu='Pocock')Symmetrictwo-sided
 group sequential design with90 %power and 5 % Type I 
Error.Spendingcomputations assume trial stops if a bound is crossed.   
Sample   Size   AnalysisRatio*  Z   Nominal p  Spend1  0.796 
1.82    0.0346 0.03462  1.061 1.82    0.0346 0.0154Total
  0.0500  ++alpha spending:Pocockboundary.*Sample size ratio compared 
to fixed design with no interim Can anyone share some light whether the above 
analysis is stillvalid? Or for unequal spacing, I have to use Lan-Demet’s error 
spendingfunction approximations? Thank you,
[[alternative HTML version deleted]]

__
R-help@r-project.org mailing list -- To UNSUBSCRIBE and more, see
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.