Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-commons-dev-archive@www.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-commons-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 858DD6A71 for ; Tue, 19 Jul 2011 21:56:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 2964 invoked by uid 500); 19 Jul 2011 21:56:33 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-commons-dev-archive@commons.apache.org Received: (qmail 2655 invoked by uid 500); 19 Jul 2011 21:56:32 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@commons.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: "Commons Developers List" Delivered-To: mailing list dev@commons.apache.org Received: (qmail 2646 invoked by uid 99); 19 Jul 2011 21:56:31 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 19 Jul 2011 21:56:31 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.7 required=5.0 tests=FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of phil.steitz@gmail.com designates 74.125.83.171 as permitted sender) Received: from [74.125.83.171] (HELO mail-pv0-f171.google.com) (74.125.83.171) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 19 Jul 2011 21:56:24 +0000 Received: by pva4 with SMTP id 4so4467833pva.30 for ; Tue, 19 Jul 2011 14:56:02 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=H4HmS0+mVslpJwXiqHjN+uM/E9bflOd7owio25fchEk=; b=X5BMCsGKeUnjpuz8b7AjmZ8M+C22h8MCeSSdLJRnXCKEaGvTmk+6Rq2SDw8WYV2Oox PTyuzxux2mExrWEKiCGqWVmQwn/fdITmlmRPwKpUp0cDsExWltUfyPcTVJpR6Obq8QuN 3OpXOQ34QLqpdZwnnYUGvgSmptvdMHZzI4Nik= Received: by 10.143.79.6 with SMTP id g6mr3567464wfl.275.1311112562332; Tue, 19 Jul 2011 14:56:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from a.local (71-223-74-208.phnx.qwest.net [71.223.74.208]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id l19sm4361323wfk.23.2011.07.19.14.56.00 (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Tue, 19 Jul 2011 14:56:00 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <4E25FD6F.2010306@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2011 14:55:59 -0700 From: Phil Steitz User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; rv:5.0) Gecko/20110624 Thunderbird/5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Commons Developers List Subject: Re: [math] Re: Longley Data References: <4E1BE13B.2030405@gmail.com> <4E1C68BE.7070109@gmail.com> <4E1C783B.4000006@gmail.com> <4E1CA1F8.30201@gmail.com> <4E1FE49F.6020801@free.fr> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org On 7/18/11 6:31 PM, Greg Sterijevski wrote: > All, > > I have pushed the implementation of the Miller Regression technique, along > with some tests. I am sure that there are a lot of sharp corners to file > down and improve. However, I thought it would be prudent to get it out and > then we can further refine the code. Thanks! I just committed the code, with just minor cleanup. I am reviewing the article as we speak to verify implementation. Others are encouraged to join in here. We need to complete the javadoc and decide on exceptions as we stabilize the API here. > > On accuracy: > > I seem to match all of the digits of longley and wampler data. Filippelli I > have a very hard time matching except to a tolerance of 1.0e-5. If you look > at LIMDEP's website: > > http://www.limdep.com/features/capabilities/accuracy/linear_regression_3.php > > I think that the code I am checking in does a bit better. I am happy about > that. However, there are some other issues with Filippelli. Namely, one can > affect the 'accuracy' of your results depending on how you present the data. > For example, if I generate the high order polynomial naively, x1 = x0 * x0, > x2 = x0 * x1, ..., x10 = x0 * x9, then I can hit the numbers within 1.0e-5. > If, however, I generate the Filipelli regressors by multiplying numbers > whose magnitudes are similar: > x1 = x0 * x0; > x2 = x0 * x1; > x3 = x0 * x2; > x4 = x2 * x2; > x5 = x2 *x3; > x6 = x3 * x3; > Then I have a very hard time making that 1.0e-5 tolerance. > > Does anyone know if there is some article which explains the proper way to > set up Filippelli's test? Have not seen anything on this. > > > Speaking to Luc's point, maybe the correct thing to do is to move to > arbitrary precision. I wanted to avoid this until I was at a deadend. > Perhaps the time is now.... To generate the x values, yes that would probably be best. Phil > > On tests: > > I intend to push 3-4 tests soon. There are 17 tests in the first suite I > sent in. > > -Greg > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org