Error in R: multi effects models - r
I'm having a few issue's I'd appreciate some help with.
head(new.data)
WSZ_Code Treatment_Code Year Month TTHM CL2_FREE BrO3 Colour PH TURB seasons
1 2 3 1996 1 30.7 0.35 0.5000750 0.75 7.4 0.055 winter
2 6 1 1996 2 24.8 0.25 0.5001375 0.75 6.9 0.200 winter
3 7 4 1996 2 60.4 0.05 0.5001375 0.75 7.1 0.055 winter
4 7 4 1996 2 58.1 0.15 0.5001570 0.75 7.5 0.055 winter
5 7 4 1996 3 62.2 0.20 0.5003881 2.00 7.6 0.055 spring
6 5 2 1996 3 40.3 0.15 0.5003500 2.00 7.7 0.055 spring
library(nlme)
> mod3 <- lme(TTHM ~ CL2_FREE, random= ~ 1| Treatment_Code/WSZ_Code, data=new.data, method ="ML")
> mod3
Linear mixed-effects model fit by maximum likelihood
Data: new.data
Log-likelihood: -1401.529
Fixed: TTHM ~ CL2_FREE
(Intercept) CL2_FREE
54.45240 -40.15033
Random effects:
Formula: ~1 | Treatment_Code
(Intercept)
StdDev: 0.004156934
Formula: ~1 | WSZ_Code %in% Treatment_Code
(Intercept) Residual
StdDev: 10.90637 13.52372
Number of Observations: 345
Number of Groups:
Treatment_Code WSZ_Code %in% Treatment_Code
4 8
> plot(augPred(mod3))
Error in plot(augPred(mod3)) :
error in evaluating the argument 'x' in selecting a method for function 'plot': Error in sprintf(gettext(fmt, domain = domain), ...) :
invalid type of argument[1]: 'symbol'
I'm not sure why I get this error. The ranef plot seems OK
plot(ranef(mod3))
But that only gives the value of the random intercepts, no TTHM predictions.
I'm looking for a way to plot the predictions like in a typical augPred which would show all the random effects for each zone. Hope that makes sense.
You need a groupedData object to use augPred. I hope this helps.
Best wishes #CSJCampbell
con <- textConnection("
WSZ_Code Treatment_Code Year Month TTHM CL2_FREE BrO3 Colour PH TURB seasons
2 3 1996 1 30.7 0.35 0.5000750 0.75 7.4 0.055 winter
6 1 1996 2 24.8 0.25 0.5001375 0.75 6.9 0.200 winter
7 4 1996 2 60.4 0.05 0.5001375 0.75 7.1 0.055 winter
7 4 1996 2 58.1 0.15 0.5001570 0.75 7.5 0.055 winter
7 4 1996 3 62.2 0.20 0.5003881 2.00 7.6 0.055 spring
5 2 1996 3 40.3 0.15 0.5003500 2.00 7.7 0.055 spring
")
new.data <- read.table(con, header = TRUE)
library(nlme)
new.data.grp <- groupedData(TTHM ~ CL2_FREE | Treatment_Code/WSZ_Code, data = new.data)
mod3 <- lme(TTHM ~ CL2_FREE, random= ~ 1| Treatment_Code/WSZ_Code, data=new.data.grp, method ="ML")
mod3
ap3 <- augPred(mod3)
plot(ap3)
I realize most are probably using ggplot2 and lme4 at this point, but I'm a bit crufty.
Here are a couple of things that I've found working with lists of response variables that are fit using lme().
So, I've been working with a number of response variables that I want to fit to a particular set of inputs. In short my code looks something like
mymodels = list()
for(resp in my_response_vars){
f = as.formula(paste(resp,paste(my_input_vars,collapse='+'),sep='~'))
mymodels[[resp]] = lme(fixed=f,random=~wave|group,method="ML",
data=mydata, na.action=na.exclude)
}
I've been successful in treating the entries in the resulting list as normal lme() objects. The problem comes when I want to plot predictions via augPred(). Specifically I get the following error,
Error in tapply(object[[nm]], groups, FUN[["numeric"]], ...) :
arguments must have same length
So, after much searching, I decided to have a look under the hood of augPred() via debug(). Here are some of the insights I came to... I'm not sure that these qualify as bugs or if they would require a patch, but I hope they can help others with similar problems.
When calling augPred() the function looks for the name of the data that was used in the original lme() call, then inherits this object from the parent.frame() via a call to eval(). I'm not sure if this defaults to the object frame or the global, but, when I change this to data = object$data in the debug, things work. So, ostensibly, if you have used a subset of these data in your model, it will call on the full set of data.
The above causes issues if one response has missing values and you are interested in one that does not. Since it includes everything in the data.frame as part of an eventual call to gsummary() the missing values in the non-response variable will throw a wrench into things.
So, missing values mess things up. I have defaulted to making a temporary data.frame with the columns of interest, then running complete.cases() on this prior to fitting the lme() model.
mymods = list()
for(resp in my_response_vars){
f = as.formula(paste(resp,paste(my_input_vars,collapse='+'),sep='~'))
v2keep = all.vars(f) # grab terms
smdat = mydata[,c(v2keep,'group')] # include group
smdat=smdat[complete.cases(smdat),] # scrub missing
tmpmod = lme(fixed=f, random=~wave|group,
method='ML', data=smdat)
mymods[[resp]] = tmpmod
# include augPred() call here
}
If you are not including a primary argument in your call to augPred() it will require that your data.frame is a groupedData() object.
So, if you are running into the arguments must have the same length error, try: subsetting your data first under a different name, make sure to clear out missing rows explicitly prior to fitting your model.
Related
Why do I keep getting the "The number of variables in newx must be 8" error when I'm trying to predict on the test set in R?
I'm trying to build a logistic regression with a dataset containing 9 variables and 3000 observations. This is what it looks like with the head() function: Sex Length Diameter Height WholeWeight ShuckedWeight VisceraWeight ShellWeight Age 1516 3 0.655 0.510 0.215 1.7835 0.8885 0.4095 0.4195 1 529 1 0.570 0.450 0.160 0.9715 0.3965 0.2550 0.2600 1 1244 2 0.385 0.280 0.085 0.2175 0.0970 0.0380 0.0670 2 1880 2 0.545 0.430 0.140 0.6870 0.2615 0.1405 0.2500 2 1311 2 0.545 0.405 0.135 0.5945 0.2700 0.1185 0.1850 2 1759 3 0.735 0.590 0.215 1.7470 0.7275 0.4030 0.5570 1 My membership class is Age and I want to build a lasso model with it, which I have done. The problem is that the predict() function returns this error and I have no idea what to do about it: "The number of variables in newx must be 8" . The code I have used is below: myabalone<-read.table(file.choose(), header = T, stringsAsFactors = T) myabalone$Sex<-as.numeric(myabalone$Sex) myabalone$Age<-as.numeric(myabalone$Age) set.seed(69) mysampleabalone<-myabalone[sample(nrow(myabalone)),] train<-mysampleabalone[1:floor(nrow(mysampleabalone)*0.7),] test<-mysampleabalone[(floor(nrow(mysampleabalone)*0.7)+1):nrow(mysampleabalone),] set.seed(300) x<-model.matrix(Age~., train)[,-1] y<-ifelse(train$Age=="1", "1", "0") cv.lasso<-cv.glmnet(x,y, alpha=1, family="binomial") model2<-glmnet(x,y, family="binomial", alpha=1, lambda=cv.lasso$lambda.1se) set.seed(123) predicted<-predict(model2, test, type = "response") This is where the "The number of variables in newx must be 8" error occurs. Why should there be 8 variables and not 9, if the training data I used to build the model also has 9 variables? I have seen in other posts suggested that I should try to pass the test set as.data.frame(), because there might be some issues with the column names, but I tried and nothing. Plus, when I use the head() function on it, it returns exactly the same column names as the training set used for the building the model. Anybody has any ideas how do I fix this?
Why can't I use cv.glm on the output of bestglm?
I am trying to do best subset selection on the wine dataset, and then I want to get the test error rate using 10 fold CV. The code I used is - cost1 <- function(good, pi=0) mean(abs(good-pi) > 0.5) res.best.logistic <- bestglm(Xy = winedata, family = binomial, # binomial family for logistic IC = "AIC", # Information criteria method = "exhaustive") res.best.logistic$BestModels best.cv.err<- cv.glm(winedata,res.best.logistic$BestModel,cost1, K=10) However, this gives the error - Error in UseMethod("family") : no applicable method for 'family' applied to an object of class "NULL" I thought that $BestModel is the lm-object that represents the best fit, and that's what manual also says. If that's the case, then why cant I find the test error on it using 10 fold CV, with the help of cv.glm? The dataset used is the white wine dataset from https://archive.ics.uci.edu/ml/datasets/Wine+Quality and the package used is the boot package for cv.glm, and the bestglm package. The data was processed as - winedata <- read.delim("winequality-white.csv", sep = ';') winedata$quality[winedata$quality< 7] <- "0" #recode winedata$quality[winedata$quality>=7] <- "1" #recode winedata$quality <- factor(winedata$quality)# Convert the column to a factor names(winedata)[names(winedata) == "quality"] <- "good" #rename 'quality' to 'good'
bestglm fit rearranges your data and name your response variable as y, hence if you pass it back into cv.glm, winedata does not have a column y and everything crashes after that It's always good to check what is the class: class(res.best.logistic$BestModel) [1] "glm" "lm" But if you look at the call of res.best.logistic$BestModel: res.best.logistic$BestModel$call glm(formula = y ~ ., family = family, data = Xi, weights = weights) head(res.best.logistic$BestModel$model) y fixed.acidity volatile.acidity citric.acid residual.sugar chlorides 1 0 7.0 0.27 0.36 20.7 0.045 2 0 6.3 0.30 0.34 1.6 0.049 3 0 8.1 0.28 0.40 6.9 0.050 4 0 7.2 0.23 0.32 8.5 0.058 5 0 7.2 0.23 0.32 8.5 0.058 6 0 8.1 0.28 0.40 6.9 0.050 free.sulfur.dioxide density pH sulphates 1 45 1.0010 3.00 0.45 2 14 0.9940 3.30 0.49 3 30 0.9951 3.26 0.44 4 47 0.9956 3.19 0.40 5 47 0.9956 3.19 0.40 6 30 0.9951 3.26 0.44 You can substitute things in the call etc, but it's too much of a mess. Fitting is not costly, so make a fit on winedata and pass it to cv.glm: best_var = apply(res.best.logistic$BestModels[,-ncol(winedata)],1,which) # take the variable names for best model best_var = names(best_var[[1]]) new_form = as.formula(paste("good ~", paste(best_var,collapse="+"))) fit = glm(new_form,winedata,family="binomial") best.cv.err<- cv.glm(winedata,fit,cost1, K=10)
Loop through variables to make regressions
I am wondering if I can run multiple regressions over this data frame: Country Years FDI_InFlow_MilUSD FDI_InFlow_percGDP FDI_InStock_MilUSD FDI_OutFlow_MilUSD FDI_OutFlow_percGDP 1 Netherlands 1990 11063.31 3.52 71827.79 14371.94 34.96 2 Romania 1990 0.01 0.00 0.01 18.00 0.16 3 Netherlands 1991 6074.61 1.88 75404.38 13484.54 37.09 4 Romania 1991 40.00 0.13 44.00 3.00 0.29 5 Netherlands 1992 6392.10 1.78 73918.54 13153.78 33.15 6 Romania 1992 77.00 0.37 122.00 4.00 0.38 I would like to run the regression over all variables of interest 3:7 in this case(my original data has 10 variables but I think that's enough to get the point of what I want). Also I would like to have the lm results stored in a data frame and also grouped by Country(if that's possible), rather than making 2 dfs for each Country and then looping through them.. Here's an example of a wanted df(this one isn't grouped): # term estimate std.error statistic p.value # 1 (Intercept) -3.2002150 0.256885790 -12.457735 8.141394e-25 # 2 Sepal.Length 0.7529176 0.043530170 17.296454 2.325498e-37 # 3 (Intercept) 3.1568723 0.413081984 7.642242 2.474053e-12 # 4 Sepal.Width -0.6402766 0.133768277 -4.786461 4.073229e-06 # 5 (Intercept) -0.3630755 0.039761990 -9.131221 4.699798e-16 # 6 Petal.Length 0.4157554 0.009582436 43.387237 4.675004e-86 Here's and example of desired result: in this case the calculations are for both countries and are just assigned twice for each Country Country term estimate std.error statistic p.value 1 Netherlands (Intercept) -67825.16741 2.229068e+04 -3.042759 3.615586e-03 2 Netherlands GDP_pcap_USD 14.04734 7.908839e-01 17.761576 3.285528e-24 3 Romania (Intercept) -67825.16741 2.229068e+04 -3.042759 3.615586e-03 4 Romania GDP_pcap_USD 14.04734 7.908839e-01 17.761576 3.285528e-24 I used this line of code: FDI2 %>% group_by(Country) %>% do(tidy(lm(FDI_InStock_MilUSD ~ GDP_pcap_USD, data= FDI2)))
If I understand correctly, the following will do what you want. All that is needed is to note that lm can fit a multiple regression model and return an object of class "mlm". models <- lm(as.matrix(df1[-(1:2)]) ~ Country + Years, df1) class(models) #[1] "mlm" "lm" smry <- summary(models) result <- lapply(smry, coef) result <- do.call(rbind, result) head(result) Estimate Std. Error t value Pr(>|t|) #(Intercept) 2.294616e+06 1.847179e+06 1.2422273 0.30241037 #CountryRomania -7.804337e+03 1.515033e+03 -5.1512655 0.01418200 #Years -1.148555e+03 9.277644e+02 -1.2379813 0.30377452 #(Intercept) 6.843108e+02 7.063395e+02 0.9688129 0.40410011 #CountryRomania -2.226667e+00 5.793307e-01 -3.8435157 0.03107572 #Years -3.425000e-01 3.547662e-01 -0.9654247 0.40554755
Fitting linear model / ANOVA by group [duplicate]
This question already has answers here: Linear Regression and group by in R (10 answers) Closed 6 years ago. I'm trying to run anova() in R and running into some difficulty. This is what I've done up to now to help shed some light on my question. Here is the str() of my data to this point. str(mhw) 'data.frame': 500 obs. of 5 variables: $ r : int 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... $ c : int 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ... $ grain: num 3.63 4.07 4.51 3.9 3.63 3.16 3.18 3.42 3.97 3.4 ... $ straw: num 6.37 6.24 7.05 6.91 5.93 5.59 5.32 5.52 6.03 5.66 ... $ Quad : Factor w/ 4 levels "NE","NW","SE",..: 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 ... Column r is a numerical value indicating which row in the field an individual plot resides Column c is a numerical value indicating which column an individual plot resides Column Quad corresponds to the geographical location in the field to which each plot resides Quad <- ifelse(mhw$c > 13 & mhw$r < 11, "NE",ifelse(mhw$c < 13 & mhw$r < 11,"NW", ifelse(mhw$c < 13 & mhw$r >= 11, "SW","SE"))) mhw <- cbind(mhw, Quad) I have fit a lm() as follows nov.model <-lm(mhw$grain ~ mhw$straw) anova(nov.model) This is an anova() for the entire field, which is testing grain yield against straw yield for each plot in the dataset. My trouble is that I want to run an individual anova() for the Quad column of my data to test grain yield and straw yield in each quadrant. perhaps a with() might fix that. I have never used it before and I am in the process of learning R currently. Any help would be greatly appreciated.
I think you are looking for by facility in R. fit <- with(mhw, by(mhw, Quad, function (dat) lm(grain ~ straw, data = dat))) Since you have 4 levels in Quad, you end up with 4 linear models in fit, i.e., fit is a "by" class object (a type of "list") of length 4. To get coefficient for each model, you can use sapply(fit, coef) To produce model summary, use lapply(fit, summary) To export ANOVA table, use lapply(fit, anova) As a reproducible example, I am taking the example from ?by: tmp <- with(warpbreaks, by(warpbreaks, tension, function(x) lm(breaks ~ wool, data = x))) class(tmp) # [1] "by" mode(tmp) # [1] "list" sapply(tmp, coef) # L M H #(Intercept) 44.55556 24.000000 24.555556 #woolB -16.33333 4.777778 -5.777778 lapply(tmp, anova) #$L #Analysis of Variance Table # #Response: breaks # Df Sum Sq Mean Sq F value Pr(>F) #wool 1 1200.5 1200.50 5.6531 0.03023 * #Residuals 16 3397.8 212.36 #--- #Signif. codes: 0 ‘***’ 0.001 ‘**’ 0.01 ‘*’ 0.05 ‘.’ 0.1 ‘ ’ 1 # #$M #Analysis of Variance Table # #Response: breaks # Df Sum Sq Mean Sq F value Pr(>F) #wool 1 102.72 102.722 1.2531 0.2795 #Residuals 16 1311.56 81.972 # #$H #Analysis of Variance Table # #Response: breaks # Df Sum Sq Mean Sq F value Pr(>F) #wool 1 150.22 150.222 2.3205 0.1472 #Residuals 16 1035.78 64.736 I was aware of this option, but not familiar with it. Thanks to #Roland for providing code for the above reproducible example: library(nlme) lapply(lmList(breaks ~ wool | tension, data = warpbreaks), anova) For your data I think it would be fit <- lmList(grain ~ straw | Quad, data = mhw) lapply(fit, anova) You don't need to install nlme; it comes with R as one of recommended packages.
Find where species accumulation curve reaches asymptote
I have used the specaccum() command to develop species accumulation curves for my samples. Here is some example data: site1<-c(0,8,9,7,0,0,0,8,0,7,8,0) site2<-c(5,0,9,0,5,0,0,0,0,0,0,0) site3<-c(5,0,9,0,0,0,0,0,0,6,0,0) site4<-c(5,0,9,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0) site5<-c(5,0,9,0,0,6,6,0,0,0,0,0) site6<-c(5,0,9,0,0,0,6,6,0,0,0,0) site7<-c(5,0,9,0,0,0,0,0,7,0,0,3) site8<-c(5,0,9,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,1,0) site9<-c(5,0,9,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,1,0) site10<-c(5,0,9,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,1,6) site11<-c(5,0,9,0,0,0,5,0,0,0,0,0) site12<-c(5,0,9,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0) site13<-c(5,1,9,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0) species_counts<-rbind(site1,site2,site3,site4,site5,site6,site7,site8,site9,site10,site11,site12,site13) accum <- specaccum(species_counts, method="random", permutations=100) plot(accum) In order to ensure I have sampled sufficiently, I need to make sure the curve of the species accumulation plot reaches an asymptote, defined as a slope of <0.3 between the last two points (ei between sites 12 and 13). results <- with(accum, data.frame(sites, richness, sd)) Produces this: sites richness sd 1 1 3.46 0.9991916 2 2 4.94 1.6625403 3 3 5.94 1.7513054 4 4 7.05 1.6779918 5 5 8.03 1.6542263 6 6 8.74 1.6794660 7 7 9.32 1.5497149 8 8 9.92 1.3534841 9 9 10.51 1.0492422 10 10 11.00 0.8408750 11 11 11.35 0.7017295 12 12 11.67 0.4725816 13 13 12.00 0.0000000 I feel like I'm getting there. I could generate an lm with site vs richness and extract the exact slope (tangent?) between sites 12 and 13. Going to search a bit longer here.
Streamlining your data generation process a little bit: species_counts <- matrix(c(0,8,9,7,0,0,0,8,0,7,8,0, 5,0,9,0,5,0,0,0,0,0,0,0, 5,0,9,0,0,0,0,0,0,6,0,0, 5,0,9,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0, 5,0,9,0,0,6,6,0,0,0,0,0, 5,0,9,0,0,0,6,6,0,0,0,0, 5,0,9,0,0,0,0,0,7,0,0,3, 5,0,9,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,1,0, 5,0,9,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,1,0, 5,0,9,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,1,6, 5,0,9,0,0,0,5,0,0,0,0,0, 5,0,9,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0, 5,1,9,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0), byrow=TRUE,nrow=13) Always a good idea to set.seed() before running randomization tests (and let us know that specaccum is in the vegan package): set.seed(101) library(vegan) accum <- specaccum(species_counts, method="random", permutations=100) Extract the richness and sites components from within the returned object and compute d(richness)/d(sites) (note that the slope vector is one element shorter than the origin site/richness vectors: be careful if you're trying to match up slopes with particular numbers of sites) (slopes <- with(accum,diff(richness)/diff(sites))) ## [1] 1.45 1.07 0.93 0.91 0.86 0.66 0.65 0.45 0.54 0.39 0.32 0.31 In this case, the slope never actually goes below 0.3, so this code for finding the first time that the slope falls below 0.3: which(slopes<0.3)[1] returns NA.