On 3/24/2006 9:10 AM, Antonio, Fabio Di Narzo wrote: > 2006/3/24, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >> >> >>>>> "Duncan" == Duncan Murdoch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> >>>>> on Fri, 24 Mar 2006 13:55:03 +0100 (CET) writes: >> >> Duncan> (Moved from r-devel to r-bugs) >> Duncan> On 3/24/2006 5:03 AM, Antonio, Fabio Di Narzo wrote: >> >> Hi all. >> >> There's a bug in plot.acf, when plotting acf for multivariate time >> series. >> >> Here a reproducible example: >> >> >> >> X <- rnorm(1000) >> >> Y <- -X + rnorm(1000, sd=0.6) >> >> Z <- cbind(X,Y) >> >> >> >> In >> >> acf(Z) >> >> cross-correlation plot y-axis is limited to 0-1. But: >> >> acf(Z, ylim=c(-1,1)) >> >> shows that there was a negative correlation, that was cut away in >> the >> >> previous plot. >> >> >> >> I've seen the error is trivial. There's something like: >> >> >> >> for(each pair of univariate time series) { >> >> if(is.null(ylim)) { >> >> ...#set ylim properly >> >> } >> >> ... >> >> } >> >> >> >> in plot.acf code, so that in the first iteration the ylim par is >> properly >> >> set to about c(0,1), but in >> >> subsequent interations, ylim is no more NULL, and the old, unproper >> ylim >> >> specification >> >> remains. >> >> Duncan> Thanks for noticing this. It's easy to fix, but >> Duncan> before I do, I'd like an opinion on the proper fix. >> Duncan> Should all the plots use the same ylim, or in the >> Duncan> case where it is unspecified, should they each >> Duncan> choose their own? I can see arguments for both >> Duncan> possibilities. >> >> Duncan> Duncan Murdoch >> >> I'd vote for the first one, a common y-scale. >> Only that is also consistent with the behavior of explicitly >> speficied 'ylim'. >> >> Martin > > > This sounds to me to be the best, also for visual comparison of multiple > plots at once (having them all on the same screen...). > Antonio, Fabio Di Narzo.
Okay, will do it that way. Duncan Murdoch ______________________________________________ R-devel@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel