Re: [R] Positive Definite Matrix

2011-02-01 Thread Kjetil Halvorsen
see inline below. On Tue, Feb 1, 2011 at 2:25 PM, Mike Marchywka wrote: > > > > >>Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2011 15:41:01 + >>From: alex.sm...@gmail.com >>To: spencer.gra...@structuremonitoring.com >>CC: r-help@r-project.org; maech...@stat.math.ethz.ch >>

Re: [R] Positive Definite Matrix

2011-02-01 Thread Alex Smith
gra...@structuremonitoring.com > >CC: r-help@r-project.org; maech...@stat.math.ethz.ch > >Subject: Re: [R] Positive Definite Matrix > > > >Hello thank you for so much input. I am afraid that I am fairly new to > this > and some of the material is above my understandin

Re: [R] Positive Definite Matrix

2011-02-01 Thread Mike Marchywka
>Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2011 15:41:01 + >From: alex.sm...@gmail.com >To: spencer.gra...@structuremonitoring.com >CC: r-help@r-project.org; maech...@stat.math.ethz.ch >Subject: Re: [R] Positive Definite Matrix >Hello thank you for so much input. I am afraid that I am fairly ne

Re: [R] Positive Definite Matrix

2011-02-01 Thread Alex Smith
Hello thank you for so much input. I am afraid that I am fairly new to this and some of the material is above my understanding for the time being and I am not looking at anything very complex as you will see from the program I will include. I have been talking to a fellow colleague I am working wit

Re: [R] Positive Definite Matrix

2011-01-31 Thread Spencer Graves
Hi, Martin: Thank you! (not only for your responses in this email thread but in helping create R generally and many of these functions in particular.) Spencer On 1/31/2011 12:10 AM, Martin Maechler wrote: > I think the bottom line can be summarized as > follows: >

Re: [R] Positive Definite Matrix

2011-01-31 Thread Martin Maechler
>I think the bottom line can be summarized as > follows: > 1. Give up on Cholesky factors unless you have a > matrix you know must be symmetric and strictly positive > definite. (I seem to recall having had problems with chol > even with matrices that were theor

Re: [R] Positive Definite Matrix

2011-01-30 Thread Mike Miller
On Sun, 30 Jan 2011, David Winsemius wrote: On Jan 30, 2011, at 6:02 AM, Alex Smith wrote: Thank you for all your input but I'm afraid I dont know what the final conclusion is. I will have to check the the eigenvalues if any are negative. Why would setting them to zero make a difference? Sorr

Re: [R] Positive Definite Matrix

2011-01-30 Thread Mike Miller
On Sun, 30 Jan 2011, David Winsemius wrote: On Jan 30, 2011, at 6:02 AM, Alex Smith wrote: Thank you for all your input but I'm afraid I dont know what the final conclusion is. I will have to check the the eigenvalues if any are negative. Why would setting them to zero make a difference? Sorr

Re: [R] Positive Definite Matrix

2011-01-30 Thread Ravi Varadhan
January 30, 2011 9:22 am Subject: Re: [R] Positive Definite Matrix To: Alex Smith Cc: r-help@r-project.org, John Fox , Prof Brian Ripley > I think the bottom line can be summarized as follows: > > > 1. Give up on Cholesky factors unless you have a matrix > you kno

Re: [R] Positive Definite Matrix

2011-01-30 Thread David Winsemius
On Jan 30, 2011, at 6:02 AM, Alex Smith wrote: Thank you for all your input but I'm afraid I dont know what the final conclusion is. I will have to check the the eigenvalues if any are negative. Why would setting them to zero make a difference? Sorry to drag this on. The discussion is p

Re: [R] Positive Definite Matrix

2011-01-30 Thread Spencer Graves
I think the bottom line can be summarized as follows: 1. Give up on Cholesky factors unless you have a matrix you know must be symmetric and strictly positive definite. (I seem to recall having had problems with chol even with matrices that were theoretically positive or n

Re: [R] Positive Definite Matrix

2011-01-30 Thread Alex Smith
Thank you for all your input but I'm afraid I dont know what the final conclusion is. I will have to check the the eigenvalues if any are negative. Why would setting them to zero make a difference? Sorry to drag this on. Thanks On Sat, Jan 29, 2011 at 9:00 PM, Prof Brian Ripley wrote: > On Sat,

Re: [R] Positive Definite Matrix

2011-01-29 Thread Martin Maechler
> Prof Brian Ripley > on Sat, 29 Jan 2011 21:00:19 + (GMT) writes: > On Sat, 29 Jan 2011, David Winsemius wrote: >> >> On Jan 29, 2011, at 12:17 PM, Prof Brian Ripley wrote: >> >>> On Sat, 29 Jan 2011, David Winsemius wrote: >>> On Jan

Re: [R] Positive Definite Matrix

2011-01-29 Thread Alex Smith
Thank you for the links and the information.You have been very helpful On Sat, Jan 29, 2011 at 2:45 PM, David Winsemius wrote: > > On Jan 29, 2011, at 7:58 AM, David Winsemius wrote: > > >> On Jan 29, 2011, at 7:22 AM, Alex Smith wrote: >> >> Hello I am trying to determine wether a given matrix

Re: [R] Positive Definite Matrix

2011-01-29 Thread Prof Brian Ripley
On Sat, 29 Jan 2011, David Winsemius wrote: On Jan 29, 2011, at 12:17 PM, Prof Brian Ripley wrote: On Sat, 29 Jan 2011, David Winsemius wrote: On Jan 29, 2011, at 10:11 AM, David Winsemius wrote: On Jan 29, 2011, at 9:59 AM, John Fox wrote: Dear David and Alex, I'd be a little careful a

Re: [R] Positive Definite Matrix

2011-01-29 Thread David Winsemius
On Jan 29, 2011, at 12:17 PM, Prof Brian Ripley wrote: On Sat, 29 Jan 2011, David Winsemius wrote: On Jan 29, 2011, at 10:11 AM, David Winsemius wrote: On Jan 29, 2011, at 9:59 AM, John Fox wrote: Dear David and Alex, I'd be a little careful about testing exact equality as in all(M == t

Re: [R] Positive Definite Matrix

2011-01-29 Thread Prof Brian Ripley
On Sat, 29 Jan 2011, David Winsemius wrote: On Jan 29, 2011, at 10:11 AM, David Winsemius wrote: On Jan 29, 2011, at 9:59 AM, John Fox wrote: Dear David and Alex, I'd be a little careful about testing exact equality as in all(M == t(M) and careful as well about a test such as all(eigen(

Re: [R] Positive Definite Matrix

2011-01-29 Thread David Winsemius
On Jan 29, 2011, at 10:11 AM, David Winsemius wrote: On Jan 29, 2011, at 9:59 AM, John Fox wrote: Dear David and Alex, I'd be a little careful about testing exact equality as in all(M == t(M) and careful as well about a test such as all(eigen(M)$values > 0) since real arithmetic on a c

Re: [R] Positive Definite Matrix

2011-01-29 Thread David Winsemius
r-project.org ] On Behalf Of David Winsemius Sent: January-29-11 9:46 AM To: Alex Smith Cc: r-help@r-project.org Help Subject: Re: [R] Positive Definite Matrix On Jan 29, 2011, at 7:58 AM, David Winsemius wrote: On Jan 29, 2011, at 7:22 AM, Alex Smith wrote: Hello I am trying to determine w

Re: [R] Positive Definite Matrix

2011-01-29 Thread John Fox
David Winsemius > Sent: January-29-11 9:46 AM > To: Alex Smith > Cc: r-help@r-project.org Help > Subject: Re: [R] Positive Definite Matrix > > > On Jan 29, 2011, at 7:58 AM, David Winsemius wrote: > > > > > On Jan 29, 2011, at 7:22 AM, Alex Smith wrote: > &

Re: [R] Positive Definite Matrix

2011-01-29 Thread David Winsemius
On Jan 29, 2011, at 7:58 AM, David Winsemius wrote: On Jan 29, 2011, at 7:22 AM, Alex Smith wrote: Hello I am trying to determine wether a given matrix is symmetric and positive matrix. The matrix has real valued elements. I have been reading about the cholesky method and another method is

Re: [R] Positive Definite Matrix

2011-01-29 Thread David Winsemius
On Jan 29, 2011, at 7:22 AM, Alex Smith wrote: Hello I am trying to determine wether a given matrix is symmetric and positive matrix. The matrix has real valued elements. I have been reading about the cholesky method and another method is to find the eigenvalues. I cant understand how to imp

[R] Positive Definite Matrix

2011-01-29 Thread Alex Smith
Hello I am trying to determine wether a given matrix is symmetric and positive matrix. The matrix has real valued elements. I have been reading about the cholesky method and another method is to find the eigenvalues. I cant understand how to implement either of the two. Can someone point me to the