I am simulating some draws using random numbers. Unlikely, the generated numbers are not random as I would like. In fact, I obtain that there are some linear combinations.
In details, I have the following starting data:
start_vector = c(1,10,30,40,50,100) # length equal to 6
residual_of_model = 5
n = 1000 # Number of simulations
I try to simulate n observations from a random normal distribution for each of the start_vector elements, assuming it as a "random noise" to add to the original value (that is the one into start_vector):
out_vec <- matrix(NA, nrow = n, ncol = length(start_vector))
for (h_aux in 1:length(start_vector))
{
random_noise <- rnorm(n, 0, residual_of_model)
out_vec[,h_aux] <- as.numeric(start_vector[h_aux]) + random_noise
}
At this point, I obtain a matrix of size 6x1000. In theory, I assume all the columns and the rows in the matrix are linearly independent among them.
If I try to check it, using the findLinearCombos() function from the caret package I obtain that all the columns are indepent:
caret::findLinearCombos(out_vec)
If I try to evaluate the independence among the rows, using the following code:
caret::findLinearCombos(t(out_vec))
I obtain that all the rows from 7 to 1000 are a linear combination of the first 6 (the length of start_vector).
It is really strange in my opinion, I would like to not observe no dependencies at all since the rows are generated adding a random number using rnorm.
What am I missing? Is there some bug? Thanks in advance!
Related
Objective: The overall objective of the problem is to calculate the confidence interval (CI) of various sample sizes (n=2,4..1024) of rnorm, 10,000 times and then count the number of times each one fails (this likely requires a counter and an if/else statement). Finally the results are to be plotted
I am trying to calculate CI of the means for several simulations of a sample sizes, however, I am first trying to break down the code for one specific sample size a = 8.
The problem I have is that I do not know how to generate a linear model for each row. Would anyone know how I can do this? Here is what I have so far:
a <- 8
n.sim.3 <- 10000
for ( i in a) {
r.mat <- matrix(rnorm(i*n.sim.3), nrow=n.sim.3, ncol = a)
lm.tmp <- apply(three.mat,1,lm(n.sim.3~1) # The lm command is where I'm stuck I don't think this is correct)
confint.tmp <- confint(lm.tmp)
Working in R, I need to create a vector of length n with the values randomly drawn from a Poisson distribution with lambda=1, but with a lower bound of 2 and upper bound of 6 (i.e. all numbers will be either 2,3,4,5, or 6).
I am unsure how to do this. I tried creating a for loop that would replace any values outside that range with values inside the range:
seed(123)
n<-25 #example length
example<-rpois(n,1)
test<-example #redundant - only duplicating to compare with original *example* values
for (i in 1:length(n)){
if (test[i]<2||test[i]>6){
test[i]<-rpois(1,1)
}
}
But this didn't seem to work (still getting 0's and 1, etc, in test). Any ideas would be greatly appreciated!
Here is one way to generate n numbers with Poisson distribution and replace all the numbers which are outside range to random number inside the range.
n<-25 #example length
example<-rpois(n,1)
inds <- example < 2 | example > 6
example[inds] <- sample(2:6, sum(inds), replace = TRUE)
How to generates a set of random number from Binomial distribution using a set of probabilities of same dimension without using any loop (like for loop)in R? i.e I want to generates a set of random number using different probability.
Not exactly knowing what you want, but I would go like this:
N=1000
n=3
dat=data.table::data.table(p=runif(N,0,1))
dat[, X:= rbinom(N, n, p) ]
You can change n for the # of outcomes, N for the dimension, p for the probabilities you have.
I am new to simulation exercises in R. I want to create 1000 samples of size 25 from a t distribution with degrees of freedom 10.
Do I need to create a single vector of data from the rt generator, and then sample repeatedly from that? So, for example, I could create the vector:
singlevector <- rt(5000, 10) , which generates data from a t-distribution of size 5000 and df = 10. So, I would treat this as my population and then sample from it. I chose the population size of 5000 arbitrarily here.
OR, should I create my 1000 samples calling on this random t generator every time?
In other words, create a matrix with 25 rows and 1000 columns, each column containing vector corresponding to a new call of rt(25, 10).
Since you are sampling independent, identically distributed values, all three of these approaches are statistically equivalent.
call the random number generator once to get as many (or more) values than you need, then sample that vector without replacement
call the random number generator 1000 times, picking 25 values each time
call the random number generator once, picking 25000 values, then subdivide the vector into individual samples in order (rather than randomly)
The latter two are not just statistically but computationally equivalent. In the first approach, the order of samples gets scrambled, but that makes no difference to the statistical properties.
Approach #1:
set.seed(101)
x1 <- rt(25000,10)
r1 <- do.call(cbind,split(x1,sample(0:24999) %/% 25))
Illustrating the equivalence of #2 and #3:
set.seed(101)
r2 <- replicate(1000, rt(25, 10))
set.seed(101)
r3 <- matrix(rt(25000,10),nrow=25)
identical(r2,r3) ## TRUE
In general solution #3 is fastest (but all of these approaches are very fast for problems of this order of magnitude, i.e. approx 5 milliseconds (#3) vs 10 milliseconds (#2) for 25 x 1000 samples on my laptop); I would pick whichever approach is easiest for you to understand when you read the code.
I am trying to generate random numbers for a simulation (the example below uses the uniform distribution for simplicity). Why would these two methods produce different average values (a: 503.2999, b: 497.5372) when sampled 10k times with the same seed number:
set.seed(2)
a <- runif(10000, 1, 999)
draw <- function(x) {
runif(1, 1, 999)
}
b <- sapply(1:10000, draw)
print(c(mean(a), mean(b)))
In my model, the random number for the first method would be referenced within a simulation using a[sim_number] while in the second instance, the runif function would be placed inside the simulation function itself. Is there a correct way of doing it?
For completeness, the answer is that you need to set the seed before each random draw if you want them to be the same.