commons-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ted Dunning <ted.dunn...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Why not BigDecimal?
Date Fri, 12 Feb 2010 05:58:44 GMT
Doesn't R use doubles under the covers?  Note this quote from the manual:

*R has no single precision data type. All real numbers are stored in double
precision format*.

(from http://stat.ethz.ch/R-manual/R-patched/library/base/html/double.html)

Any difference in the results that you saw is likely due to different
algorithms.  If you mean rank as in the rank of a matrix, then the exact
value is very much a matter of judgment since it involves an implicit
comparison of a numerical value to zero.  Using BigDecimal is very unlikely
to have significantly affected your results.

On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 9:29 PM, Something Something <
mailinglists19@gmail.com> wrote:

> I wrote a simple program to run a Multiple Regression Analysis followed by
> Rank, and compared my results to those from R stats package and because of
> lack of precision the 'ranks' are way off.  I mean I am assuming that if we
> had used BigDecimal the ranks would have matched to the ones from R.
>
> Is there something I am missing?
>



-- 
Ted Dunning, CTO
DeepDyve

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message