Dear Jeff,
On 2022-07-28 11:12 a.m., Jeff Newmiller wrote:
No, in this case I think I needed the "obvious" breakdown. Still digesting,
though... I would prefer that if an arbitrary selection had been made that it be explicit
.. the NA should be replaced with zero if the singular.ok argument
No, in this case I think I needed the "obvious" breakdown. Still digesting,
though... I would prefer that if an arbitrary selection had been made that it
be explicit .. the NA should be replaced with zero if the singular.ok argument
is TRUE, rather than making that interpretation in
Dear Jeff,
On 2022-07-28 1:31 a.m., Jeff Newmiller wrote:
But "disappearing" is not what NA is supposed to do normally. Why is it being
treated that way here?
NA has a different meaning here than in data.
By default, in glm() the argument singular.ok is TRUE, and so estimates
are provided
But "disappearing" is not what NA is supposed to do normally. Why is it being
treated that way here?
On July 27, 2022 7:04:20 PM PDT, John Fox wrote:
>Dear Rolf,
>
>The coefficient of TrtTime:LifestageL1 isn't estimable (as you explain) and by
>setting it to NA, glm() effectively removes it
On Thu, 28 Jul 2022 00:42:51 +
"Ebert,Timothy Aaron" wrote:
> Time is often used in this sort of problem, but really time is not
> relevant. A better choice is accumulated thermal units. The insect
> will molt when X thermal units have been accumulated. This is often
> expressed as degree
Dear Rolf,
The coefficient of TrtTime:LifestageL1 isn't estimable (as you explain)
and by setting it to NA, glm() effectively removes it from the model. An
equivalent model is therefore
> fit2 <- glm(cbind(Dead,Alive) ~ TrtTime + Lifestage +
+ I((Lifestage == "Egg +
On 7/27/22 17:26, Rolf Turner wrote:
I have a data frame with a numeric ("TrtTime") and a categorical
("Lifestage") predictor.
Level "L1" of Lifestage occurs only with a single value of TrtTime,
explicitly 12, whence it is not possible to estimate a TrtTime "slope"
when Lifestage is "L1".
7 matches
Mail list logo
