Mailing-List: contact dev-help@commons.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: "Commons Developers List" <dev@commons.apache.org>
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of phil.steitz@gmail.com
 designates 209.85.210.43 as permitted sender)
Message-ID: <4E1BE13B.2030405@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2011 22:52:59 -0700
From: Phil Steitz <phil.steitz@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; en-US;
 rv:1.9.2.18) Gecko/20110616 Thunderbird/3.1.11
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Commons Developers List <dev@commons.apache.org>
Subject: Re: [math] Re: Longley Data
References: 
 <CACMPRi3FAoaUptsbQ0YBsqAbTrZ-L8qOcpy5MzCF-tF8nc6H1Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<CACMPRi2twoo1fGm3n1OEQpFD1K6999sPxuVgW+Q8SqjYyA5iYA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAPVuaYsehJgz1PGNrKmKg8H_-EMM2D8yHasBvm29a7biYwMc9w@mail.gmail.com>
	<CACMPRi1Mck=vXbu=57=Zi2wcSaw3e=u_=We=tNdbOPCyDHFkTw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CACMPRi3x=hLktDSK=K8kmTqmkJpXQkcgzCycJx9ABrEOo2hvrg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: 
 <CACMPRi3x=hLktDSK=K8kmTqmkJpXQkcgzCycJx9ABrEOo2hvrg@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On 7/11/11 9:34 PM, Greg Sterijevski wrote:
> I also ran the filipelli data through both the regression technique that I
> am working on, and the current multiple regression package. My work in
> progress gets estimates which though not great are close to the certified
> values. OLSMultipleLinearRegression exceptions out, complaining about a
> singular matrix.

I assume the design matrix is near-singular, correct?  Where did the
certified values come from?  If you have access to R, it would be
good to compare results against R as well.  There is R code in
src/test/R set up to compare results against [math].
>
> On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 11:07 PM, Greg Sterijevski
> <gsterijevski@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> Yes, my apologies. I am a bit new to this.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 10:59 PM, Henri Yandell <flamefew@gmail.com>wrote:
>>
>>> I'm assuming this is Commons Math. I've added a [math] so it catches
>>> the interest of those involved.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 8:52 PM, Greg Sterijevski
>>> <gsterijevski@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Additionally, I pass all of the Wampler beta estimates.
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 10:40 PM, Greg Sterijevski
>>>> <gsterijevski@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hello All,
>>>>>
>>>>> I am testing the first 'updating' ols regression algorithm. I ran it
>>>>> through the Wampler1 data. It gets 1.0s for all of the beta estimates.
>>> I
>>>>> next ran the Longley dataset. I match, but with a tolerance of 1.0e-6.
>>> This
>>>>> is a bit less than two orders of magnitude worse than the current
>>> incore
>>>>> estimator( 2.0e-8). My question to the list, is how important is this
>>> diff?
>>>>> Is it worth tearing things apart to figure out where the error is
>>>>> accumulating?
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>
>>>>> -Greg
>>>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>>>
>>>


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org