Hello,
.lm.fit is an order of magnitude faster than lm.fit but the Description
section warns on its use, see the examples in help("lm.fit").
Hope this helps,
Rui Barradas
Às 21:08 de 10/08/2024, Yuan Chun Ding via R-help escreveu:
You are right. I also just thought about that, no intercept
Is it because I failed to to add a column of ones for an intercept to
the x matrix? TRhat would be my bad.
-- Bert
On Sat, Aug 10, 2024 at 12:59 PM Bert Gunter wrote:
>
> Probably because you inadvertently ran different models. Without your code, I
> haven't a clue.
>
>
> On Sat, Aug 10, 2024,
Hi Bert and Ben,
Thanks a lot for your suggestion!!.
About the different residuals between lm function and lm.fit, from online
search, lt seems like that I need to add an intercept in the design matrix x;
pur2 <- matrix(gem751be.rpkm$purity2, ncol =1)
pur2.1 <- cbind(1,gem751be.rpkm$purity2
You are right. I also just thought about that, no intercept is not applicable
to my case.
Ding
From: Bert Gunter
Sent: Saturday, August 10, 2024 1:06 PM
To: Yuan Chun Ding
Cc: Ben Bolker ; r-help@r-project.org
Subject: Re: [R] a fast way to do my job
Ah, messages crossed. A no-intercept mode
after add intercept, all residuals are the same from lm or lm.fit.
Ding
From: Bert Gunter
Sent: Saturday, August 10, 2024 1:00 PM
To: Yuan Chun Ding
Cc: Ben Bolker ; r-help@r-project.org
Subject: Re: [R] a fast way to do my job
Probably because you inadvertently ran different models. Without y
Ah, messages crossed.
A no-intercept model **assumes** the straight line fit must pass
through the origin. Unless there is a strong justification for such an
assumption, you should include an intercept.
-- Bert
On Sat, Aug 10, 2024 at 1:02 PM Bert Gunter wrote:
>
> Is it because I failed to to a
Probably because you inadvertently ran different models. Without your code,
I haven't a clue.
On Sat, Aug 10, 2024, 12:29 Yuan Chun Ding wrote:
> HI Bert and Ben,
>
>
>
> Yes, running lm.fit using the matrix format is much faster. I read a
> couple of online comments why it is faster.
>
>
>
> Ho
HI Bert and Ben,
Yes, running lm.fit using the matrix format is much faster. I read a couple of
online comments why it is faster.
However, the residual values for three tested variables or genes from lm
function and lm.fit function are different, with Pearson correlation of 0.55,
0.89, and 0.9
Thanks, Ivan. I will fill out the support form at the World Bank.
On Fri, 9 Aug 2024 at 22:16, Ivan Krylov wrote:
> В Fri, 9 Aug 2024 20:25:51 +0530
> Anupam Tyagi пишет:
>
> > I am trying this in Bengaluru, India, using R-studio. I tried
> > downloading a single variable. It happened fast, in
> On 9. Aug 2024, at 10:45, CALUM POLWART wrote:
>
> Or use <<- assignment I think. (I usually return, but return can only
> return one object and I think you want two or more
>
One can return multiple objects by putting them in a list and returning the
list.
Martin
__
10 matches
Mail list logo