Forgot the url:
https://win-vector.com/2014/05/30/trimming-the-fat-from-glm-models-in-r/
On Aug 10, 2020, at 11:50 AM, John Mount
mailto:jmo...@win-vector.com>> wrote:
Thank you for your suggestion. I do know how to work around the issue. I
usually build a fresh environment as a child of base
Thank you for your suggestion. I do know how to work around the issue. I
usually build a fresh environment as a child of base-environment and then
insurt the weights there. I was just trying to provide an example of the issue.
emptyenv() can not be used, as it is needed for the eval (errors out
On 10/08/2020 1:42 p.m., John Mount wrote:
I wish I had started with "I am disappointed that lm() doesn't continue its search for weights
into the calling environment" or "the fact that lm() looks only in the formula
environment and data frame for weights doesn't seem consistent with how other
I assume you are concerned about this because the formula is defined
in one environment and the model fitting with weights occurs in a
separate function. If that is the case then the model fitting
function can create a new environment, a child of the formula's
environment, add the weights variable
I wish I had started with "I am disappointed that lm() doesn't continue its
search for weights into the calling environment" or "the fact that lm() looks
only in the formula environment and data frame for weights doesn't seem
consistent with how other values are treated."
But I did not. So I do
On 09/08/2020 3:07 p.m., Duncan Murdoch wrote:
On 09/08/2020 3:01 p.m., John Mount wrote:
Doesn't this preclude "y ~ ." style notations?
Yes, but you can use "y ~ . - w".
And as was pointed out to me offline, often one doesn't have a simple
vector w giving the weights, instead one computes
On 09/08/2020 3:01 p.m., John Mount wrote:
Doesn't this preclude "y ~ ." style notations?
Yes, but you can use "y ~ . - w".
Duncan Murdoch
On Aug 9, 2020, at 11:56 AM, Duncan Murdoch wrote:
This is fairly clearly documented in ?lm:
"All of weights, subset and offset are evaluated in th
Doesn't this preclude "y ~ ." style notations?
> On Aug 9, 2020, at 11:56 AM, Duncan Murdoch wrote:
>
> This is fairly clearly documented in ?lm:
>
> "All of weights, subset and offset are evaluated in the same way as variables
> in formula, that is first in data and then in the environment of
This is fairly clearly documented in ?lm:
"All of weights, subset and offset are evaluated in the same way as
variables in formula, that is first in data and then in the environment
of formula."
There are lots of possible places to look for weights, but this seems to
me like a pretty sensibl
I know this programmers can reason this out from R's late parameter evaluation
rules PLUS the explicit match.call()/eval() lm() does to work with the passed
in formula and data frame. But, from a statistical user point of view this
seems to be counter-productive. At best it works as if the user
10 matches
Mail list logo
