Hi David, hello R-experts
Thank you for your input. I have tried the syntax you suggested but
unfortunately the marginal distributions v1xv2 change after the
manipulation. Please see below or
https://www.dropbox.com/s/qhmpkkrejjkpbkx/sample_code.txt?dl=0 for the
syntax.
> rm(list=ls())
>
> # this is usual (an extract of) the INPUT file I have:
> f1 <- structure(list(v1 = c("A", "A", "A", "A", "A", "A", "B", "B",
+ "B", "B", "B", "B"), v2 = c("A", "B", "C", "A", "B", "C", "A",
+ "B", "C", "A", "B", "C"), v3 = c("B", "B", "B", "C", "C", "C",
+ "B", "B", "B", "C", "C", "C"), v4 = c(18.18530, 3.43806,0.00273, 1.42917,
1.05786, 0.00042, 2.37232, 3.01835, 0, 1.13430, 0.92872,
+ 0)), .Names = c("v1", "v2", "v3", "v4"), class = "data.frame", row.names
= c(2L,
+ 9L, 11L, 41L, 48L, 50L, 158L, 165L, 167L, 197L, 204L, 206L))
>
> #first I order the file such that I have 6 distinct v1xv2 combinations
> f1 <- f1[order(f1$v1,f1$v2),]
>
> # then I compute (manually) the relative importance of each v1xv2
combination:
> tAA <-
(18.18530+1.42917)/(18.18530+1.42917+3.43806+1.05786+0.00273+0.00042+2.37232+1.13430+3.01835+0.92872+0.00000+0.00000)
# this is for combination v1=A & v2=A
> tAB <-
(3.43806+1.05786)/(18.18530+1.42917+3.43806+1.05786+0.00273+0.00042+2.37232+1.13430+3.01835+0.92872+0.00000+0.00000)
# this is for combination v1=A & v2=B
> tAC <-
(0.00273+0.00042)/(18.18530+1.42917+3.43806+1.05786+0.00273+0.00042+2.37232+1.13430+3.01835+0.92872+0.00000+0.00000)
# this is for combination v1=A & v2=C
> tBA <-
(2.37232+1.13430)/(18.18530+1.42917+3.43806+1.05786+0.00273+0.00042+2.37232+1.13430+3.01835+0.92872+0.00000+0.00000)
# this is for combination v1=B & v2=A
> tBB <-
(3.01835+0.92872)/(18.18530+1.42917+3.43806+1.05786+0.00273+0.00042+2.37232+1.13430+3.01835+0.92872+0.00000+0.00000)
# this is for combination v1=B & v2=B
> tBC <-
(0.00000+0.00000)/(18.18530+1.42917+3.43806+1.05786+0.00273+0.00042+2.37232+1.13430+3.01835+0.92872+0.00000+0.00000)
# this is for combination v1=B & v2=C
> # and just to make sure I have not made mistakes the following should be
equal to 1
> tAA+tAB+tAC+tBA+tBB+tBC
[1] 1
>
> # procedure suggested by David Winsemius
> lookarr <- array(NA,
dim=c(length(unique(f1$v1)),length(unique(f1$v2)),length(unique(f1$v3)) ) ,
dimnames=list( unique(f1$v1), unique(f1$v2), unique(f1$v3) ) )
> lookarr[] <- c(tAA,tAA,tAB,tAB,tAC,tAC,tBA,tBA,tBB,tBB,tBC,tBC)
> lookarr["A","B","C"]
[1] 0.1250369
> lookarr[ with(f1, cbind(v1, v2, v3)) ]
[1] 6.213554e-01 1.110842e-01 1.424236e-01 1.250369e-01 9.978703e-05
0.000000e+00 6.213554e-01 1.110842e-01 1.424236e-01 1.250369e-01
9.978703e-05
[12] 0.000000e+00
> f1$v4mod <- f1$v4*lookarr[ with(f1, cbind(v1,v2,v3)) ]
>
> # i compare original vs modified marginal distributions
> aggregate(v4~v1*v2,f1,sum)
v1 v2 v4
1 A A 19.61447
2 B A 3.50662
3 A B 4.49592
4 B B 3.94707
5 A C 0.00315
6 B C 0.00000
> aggregate(v4mod~v1*v2,f1,sum)
v1 v2 v4mod
1 A A 1.145829e+01
2 B A 1.600057e+00
3 A B 6.219326e-01
4 B B 5.460087e-01
5 A C 2.724186e-07
6 B C 0.000000e+00
> aggregate(v4~v3,f1,sum)
v3 v4
1 B 27.01676
2 C 4.55047
> aggregate(v4mod~v3,f1,sum)
v3 v4mod
1 B 13.6931347
2 C 0.5331569
Any suggestion on how this can be fixed? Remember, I am searching for a
solution where by aggregate(v4~v1*v2,f1,sum)==aggregate(v4~v1*v2,f1,sum)
while aggregate(v4~v3,f1,sum)!=aggregate(v4mod~v3,f1,sum) by specified
amounts (see my earlier example).
Thank you very much,
Luca
2015-03-22 22:11 GMT+01:00 David Winsemius <dwinsem...@comcast.net>:
>
> On Mar 22, 2015, at 1:12 PM, Luca Meyer wrote:
>
> > Hi Bert,
> >
> > Maybe I did not explain myself clearly enough. But let me show you with a
> > manual example that indeed what I would like to do is feasible.
> >
> > The following is also available for download from
> > https://www.dropbox.com/s/qhmpkkrejjkpbkx/sample_code.txt?dl=0
> >
> > rm(list=ls())
> >
> > This is usual (an extract of) the INPUT file I have:
> >
> > f1 <- structure(list(v1 = c("A", "A", "A", "A", "A", "A", "B", "B",
> > "B", "B", "B", "B"), v2 = c("A", "B", "C", "A", "B", "C", "A",
> > "B", "C", "A", "B", "C"), v3 = c("B", "B", "B", "C", "C", "C",
> > "B", "B", "B", "C", "C", "C"), v4 = c(18.18530, 3.43806,0.00273, 1.42917,
> > 1.05786, 0.00042, 2.37232, 3.01835, 0, 1.13430, 0.92872,
> > 0)), .Names = c("v1", "v2", "v3", "v4"), class = "data.frame", row.names
> =
> > c(2L,
> > 9L, 11L, 41L, 48L, 50L, 158L, 165L, 167L, 197L, 204L, 206L))
> >
> > This are the initial marginal distributions
> >
> > aggregate(v4~v1*v2,f1,sum)
> > aggregate(v4~v3,f1,sum)
> >
> > First I order the file such that I have nicely listed 6 distinct v1xv2
> > combinations.
> >
> > f1 <- f1[order(f1$v1,f1$v2),]
> >
> > Then I compute (manually) the relative importance of each v1xv2
> combination:
> >
> > tAA <-
> >
> (18.18530+1.42917)/(18.18530+1.42917+3.43806+1.05786+0.00273+0.00042+2.37232+1.13430+3.01835+0.92872+0.00000+0.00000)
> > # this is for combination v1=A & v2=A
> > tAB <-
> >
> (3.43806+1.05786)/(18.18530+1.42917+3.43806+1.05786+0.00273+0.00042+2.37232+1.13430+3.01835+0.92872+0.00000+0.00000)
> > # this is for combination v1=A & v2=B
> > tAC <-
> >
> (0.00273+0.00042)/(18.18530+1.42917+3.43806+1.05786+0.00273+0.00042+2.37232+1.13430+3.01835+0.92872+0.00000+0.00000)
> > # this is for combination v1=A & v2=C
> > tBA <-
> >
> (2.37232+1.13430)/(18.18530+1.42917+3.43806+1.05786+0.00273+0.00042+2.37232+1.13430+3.01835+0.92872+0.00000+0.00000)
> > # this is for combination v1=B & v2=A
> > tBB <-
> >
> (3.01835+0.92872)/(18.18530+1.42917+3.43806+1.05786+0.00273+0.00042+2.37232+1.13430+3.01835+0.92872+0.00000+0.00000)
> > # this is for combination v1=B & v2=B
> > tBC <-
> >
> (0.00000+0.00000)/(18.18530+1.42917+3.43806+1.05786+0.00273+0.00042+2.37232+1.13430+3.01835+0.92872+0.00000+0.00000)
> > # this is for combination v1=B & v2=C
> > # and just to make sure I have not made mistakes the following should be
> > equal to 1
> > tAA+tAB+tAC+tBA+tBB+tBC
> >
> > Next, I know I need to increase v4 any time v3=B and the total increase I
> > need to have over the whole dataset is 29-27.01676=1.98324. In turn, I
> need
> > to dimish v4 any time V3=C by the same amount (4.55047-2.56723=1.98324).
> > This aspect was perhaps not clear at first. I need to move v4 across v3
> > categories, but the totals will always remain unchanged.
> >
> > Since I want the data alteration to be proportional to the v1xv2
> > combinations I do the following:
> >
> > f1$v4 <- ifelse (f1$v1=="A" & f1$v2=="A" & f1$v3=="B",
> f1$v4+(tAA*1.98324),
> > f1$v4)
> > f1$v4 <- ifelse (f1$v1=="A" & f1$v2=="A" & f1$v3=="C",
> f1$v4-(tAA*1.98324),
> > f1$v4)
> > f1$v4 <- ifelse (f1$v1=="A" & f1$v2=="B" & f1$v3=="B",
> f1$v4+(tAB*1.98324),
> > f1$v4)
> > f1$v4 <- ifelse (f1$v1=="A" & f1$v2=="B" & f1$v3=="C",
> f1$v4-(tAB*1.98324),
> > f1$v4)
> > f1$v4 <- ifelse (f1$v1=="A" & f1$v2=="C" & f1$v3=="B",
> f1$v4+(tAC*1.98324),
> > f1$v4)
> > f1$v4 <- ifelse (f1$v1=="A" & f1$v2=="C" & f1$v3=="C",
> f1$v4-(tAC*1.98324),
> > f1$v4)
> > f1$v4 <- ifelse (f1$v1=="B" & f1$v2=="A" & f1$v3=="B",
> f1$v4+(tBA*1.98324),
> > f1$v4)
> > f1$v4 <- ifelse (f1$v1=="B" & f1$v2=="A" & f1$v3=="C",
> f1$v4-(tBA*1.98324),
> > f1$v4)
> > f1$v4 <- ifelse (f1$v1=="B" & f1$v2=="B" & f1$v3=="B",
> f1$v4+(tBB*1.98324),
> > f1$v4)
> > f1$v4 <- ifelse (f1$v1=="B" & f1$v2=="B" & f1$v3=="C",
> f1$v4-(tBB*1.98324),
> > f1$v4)
> > f1$v4 <- ifelse (f1$v1=="B" & f1$v2=="C" & f1$v3=="B",
> f1$v4+(tBC*1.98324),
> > f1$v4)
> > f1$v4 <- ifelse (f1$v1=="B" & f1$v2=="C" & f1$v3=="C",
> f1$v4-(tBC*1.98324),
> > f1$v4)
> >
>
> Seems that this could be done a lot more simply with a lookup matrix and
> ordinary indexing
>
> > lookarr <- array(NA,
> dim=c(length(unique(f1$v1)),length(unique(f1$v2)),length(unique(f1$v3)) ) ,
> dimnames=list( unique(f1$v1), unique(f1$v2), unique(f1$v3) ) )
> > lookarr[] <- c(tAA,tAA,tAB,tAB,tAC,tAC,tBA,tBA,
> tBB, tBB, tBC, tBC)
>
> > lookarr[ "A","B","C"]
> [1] 0.1250369
>
> > lookarr[ with(f1, cbind(v1, v2, v3)) ]
> [1] 6.213554e-01 1.110842e-01 1.424236e-01 1.250369e-01 9.978703e-05
> [6] 0.000000e+00 6.213554e-01 1.110842e-01 1.424236e-01 1.250369e-01
> [11] 9.978703e-05 0.000000e+00
> > f1$v4mod <- f1$v4*lookarr[ with(f1, cbind(v1,v2,v3)) ]
> > f1
> v1 v2 v3 v4 v4mod
> 2 A A B 18.18530 1.129954e+01
> 41 A A C 1.42917 1.587582e-01
> 9 A B B 3.43806 4.896610e-01
> 48 A B C 1.05786 1.322716e-01
> 11 A C B 0.00273 2.724186e-07
> 50 A C C 0.00042 0.000000e+00
> 158 B A B 2.37232 1.474054e+00
> 197 B A C 1.13430 1.260028e-01
> 165 B B B 3.01835 4.298844e-01
> 204 B B C 0.92872 1.161243e-01
> 167 B C B 0.00000 0.000000e+00
> 206 B C C 0.00000 0.000000e+00
>
> --
> david.
>
>
> > This are the final marginal distributions:
> >
> > aggregate(v4~v1*v2,f1,sum)
> > aggregate(v4~v3,f1,sum)
> >
> > Can this procedure be made programmatic so that I can run it on the
> > (8x13x13) categories matrix? if so, how would you do it? I have really
> hard
> > time to do it with some (semi)automatic procedure.
> >
> > Thank you very much indeed once more :)
> >
> > Luca
> >
> >
> > 2015-03-22 18:32 GMT+01:00 Bert Gunter <gunter.ber...@gene.com>:
> >
> >> Nonsense. You are not telling us something or I have failed to
> >> understand something.
> >>
> >> Consider:
> >>
> >> v1 = c("a","b")
> >> v2 = "c("a","a")
> >>
> >> It is not possible to change the value of a sum of values
> >> corresponding to v2="a" without also changing that for v1, which is
> >> not supposed to change according to my understanding of your
> >> specification.
> >>
> >> So I'm done.
> >>
> >> -- Bert
> >>
> >>
> >> Bert Gunter
> >> Genentech Nonclinical Biostatistics
> >> (650) 467-7374
> >>
> >> "Data is not information. Information is not knowledge. And knowledge
> >> is certainly not wisdom."
> >> Clifford Stoll
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Sun, Mar 22, 2015 at 8:28 AM, Luca Meyer <lucam1...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>> Sorry forgot to keep the rest of the group in the loop - Luca
> >>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> >>> From: Luca Meyer <lucam1...@gmail.com>
> >>> Date: 2015-03-22 16:27 GMT+01:00
> >>> Subject: Re: [R] Joining two datasets - recursive procedure?
> >>> To: Bert Gunter <gunter.ber...@gene.com>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Hi Bert,
> >>>
> >>> That is exactly what I am trying to achieve. Please notice that
> negative
> >> v4
> >>> values are allowed. I have done a similar task in the past manually by
> >>> recursively alterating v4 distribution across v3 categories within fix
> >> each
> >>> v1&v2 combination so I am quite positive it can be achieved but
> honestly
> >> I
> >>> took me forever to do it manually and since this is likely to be an
> >>> exercise I need to repeat from time to time I wish I could learn how to
> >> do
> >>> it programmatically....
> >>>
> >>> Thanks again for any further suggestion you might have,
> >>>
> >>> Luca
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> 2015-03-22 16:05 GMT+01:00 Bert Gunter <gunter.ber...@gene.com>:
> >>>
> >>>> Oh, wait a minute ...
> >>>>
> >>>> You still want the marginals for the other columns to be as
> originally?
> >>>>
> >>>> If so, then this is impossible in general as the sum of all the values
> >>>> must be what they were originally and you cannot therefore choose your
> >>>> values for V3 arbitrarily.
> >>>>
> >>>> Or at least, that seems to be what you are trying to do.
> >>>>
> >>>> -- Bert
> >>>>
> >>>> Bert Gunter
> >>>> Genentech Nonclinical Biostatistics
> >>>> (650) 467-7374
> >>>>
> >>>> "Data is not information. Information is not knowledge. And knowledge
> >>>> is certainly not wisdom."
> >>>> Clifford Stoll
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On Sun, Mar 22, 2015 at 7:55 AM, Bert Gunter <bgun...@gene.com>
> wrote:
> >>>>> I would have thought that this is straightforward given my previous
> >>>> email...
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Just set z to what you want -- e,g, all B values to 29/number of B's,
> >>>>> and all C values to 2.567/number of C's (etc. for more categories).
> >>>>>
> >>>>> A slick but sort of cheat way to do this programmatically -- in the
> >>>>> sense that it relies on the implementation of factor() rather than
> its
> >>>>> API -- is:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> y <- f1$v3 ## to simplify the notation; could be done using with()
> >>>>> z <- (c(29,2.567)/table(y))[c(y)]
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Then proceed to z1 as I previously described
> >>>>>
> >>>>> -- Bert
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Bert Gunter
> >>>>> Genentech Nonclinical Biostatistics
> >>>>> (650) 467-7374
> >>>>>
> >>>>> "Data is not information. Information is not knowledge. And knowledge
> >>>>> is certainly not wisdom."
> >>>>> Clifford Stoll
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Sun, Mar 22, 2015 at 2:00 AM, Luca Meyer <lucam1...@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>>>>> Hi Bert, hello R-experts,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I am close to a solution but I still need one hint w.r.t. the
> >> following
> >>>>>> procedure (available also from
> >>>>>> https://www.dropbox.com/s/qhmpkkrejjkpbkx/sample_code.txt?dl=0)
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> rm(list=ls())
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> # this is (an extract of) the INPUT file I have:
> >>>>>> f1 <- structure(list(v1 = c("A", "A", "A", "A", "A", "A", "B", "B",
> >> "B",
> >>>>>> "B", "B", "B"), v2 = c("A", "B", "C", "A", "B", "C", "A", "B", "C",
> >> "A",
> >>>>>> "B", "C"), v3 = c("B", "B", "B", "C", "C", "C", "B", "B", "B", "C",
> >> "C",
> >>>>>> "C"), v4 = c(18.18530, 3.43806,0.00273, 1.42917, 1.05786, 0.00042,
> >>>> 2.37232,
> >>>>>> 3.01835, 0, 1.13430, 0.92872, 0)), .Names = c("v1", "v2", "v3",
> >> "v4"),
> >>>> class
> >>>>>> = "data.frame", row.names = c(2L, 9L, 11L, 41L, 48L, 50L, 158L,
> 165L,
> >>>> 167L,
> >>>>>> 197L, 204L, 206L))
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> # this is the procedure that Bert suggested (slightly adjusted):
> >>>>>> z <- rnorm(nrow(f1)) ## or anything you want
> >>>>>> z1 <- round(with(f1,v4 + z -ave(z,v1,v2,FUN=mean)), digits=5)
> >>>>>> aggregate(v4~v1*v2,f1,sum)
> >>>>>> aggregate(z1~v1*v2,f1,sum)
> >>>>>> aggregate(v4~v3,f1,sum)
> >>>>>> aggregate(z1~v3,f1,sum)
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> My question to you is: how can I set z so that I can obtain specific
> >>>> values
> >>>>>> for z1-v4 in the v3 aggregation?
> >>>>>> In other words, how can I configure the procedure so that e.g. B=29
> >> and
> >>>>>> C=2.56723 after running the procedure:
> >>>>>> aggregate(z1~v3,f1,sum)
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Thank you,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Luca
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> PS: to avoid any doubts you might have about who I am the following
> >> is
> >>>> my
> >>>>>> web page: http://lucameyer.wordpress.com/
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> 2015-03-21 18:13 GMT+01:00 Bert Gunter <gunter.ber...@gene.com>:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> ... or cleaner:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> z1 <- with(f1,v4 + z -ave(z,v1,v2,FUN=mean))
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Just for curiosity, was this homework? (in which case I should
> >>>>>>> probably have not provided you an answer -- that is, assuming that
> I
> >>>>>>> HAVE provided an answer).
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Cheers,
> >>>>>>> Bert
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Bert Gunter
> >>>>>>> Genentech Nonclinical Biostatistics
> >>>>>>> (650) 467-7374
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> "Data is not information. Information is not knowledge. And
> >> knowledge
> >>>>>>> is certainly not wisdom."
> >>>>>>> Clifford Stoll
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On Sat, Mar 21, 2015 at 7:53 AM, Bert Gunter <bgun...@gene.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>>>>>>> z <- rnorm(nrow(f1)) ## or anything you want
> >>>>>>>> z1 <- f1$v4 + z - with(f1,ave(z,v1,v2,FUN=mean))
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> aggregate(v4~v1,f1,sum)
> >>>>>>>> aggregate(z1~v1,f1,sum)
> >>>>>>>> aggregate(v4~v2,f1,sum)
> >>>>>>>> aggregate(z1~v2,f1,sum)
> >>>>>>>> aggregate(v4~v3,f1,sum)
> >>>>>>>> aggregate(z1~v3,f1,sum)
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Cheers,
> >>>>>>>> Bert
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Bert Gunter
> >>>>>>>> Genentech Nonclinical Biostatistics
> >>>>>>>> (650) 467-7374
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> "Data is not information. Information is not knowledge. And
> >> knowledge
> >>>>>>>> is certainly not wisdom."
> >>>>>>>> Clifford Stoll
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> On Sat, Mar 21, 2015 at 6:49 AM, Luca Meyer <lucam1...@gmail.com>
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> Hi Bert,
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Thank you for your message. I am looking into ave() and tapply()
> >> as
> >>>> you
> >>>>>>>>> suggested but at the same time I have prepared a example of input
> >>>> and
> >>>>>>>>> output
> >>>>>>>>> files, just in case you or someone else would like to make an
> >>>> attempt
> >>>>>>>>> to
> >>>>>>>>> generate a code that goes from input to output.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Please see below or download it from
> >>>>>>>>> https://www.dropbox.com/s/qhmpkkrejjkpbkx/sample_code.txt?dl=0
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> # this is (an extract of) the INPUT file I have:
> >>>>>>>>> f1 <- structure(list(v1 = c("A", "A", "A", "A", "A", "A", "B",
> >> "B",
> >>>>>>>>> "B", "B", "B", "B"), v2 = c("A", "B", "C", "A", "B", "C", "A",
> >>>>>>>>> "B", "C", "A", "B", "C"), v3 = c("B", "B", "B", "C", "C", "C",
> >>>>>>>>> "B", "B", "B", "C", "C", "C"), v4 = c(18.18530, 3.43806,0.00273,
> >>>>>>>>> 1.42917,
> >>>>>>>>> 1.05786, 0.00042, 2.37232, 3.01835, 0, 1.13430, 0.92872,
> >>>>>>>>> 0)), .Names = c("v1", "v2", "v3", "v4"), class = "data.frame",
> >>>>>>>>> row.names =
> >>>>>>>>> c(2L,
> >>>>>>>>> 9L, 11L, 41L, 48L, 50L, 158L, 165L, 167L, 197L, 204L, 206L))
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> # this is (an extract of) the OUTPUT file I would like to obtain:
> >>>>>>>>> f2 <- structure(list(v1 = c("A", "A", "A", "A", "A", "A", "B",
> >> "B",
> >>>>>>>>> "B", "B", "B", "B"), v2 = c("A", "B", "C", "A", "B", "C", "A",
> >>>>>>>>> "B", "C", "A", "B", "C"), v3 = c("B", "B", "B", "C", "C", "C",
> >>>>>>>>> "B", "B", "B", "C", "C", "C"), v4 = c(17.83529, 3.43806,0.00295,
> >>>>>>>>> 1.77918,
> >>>>>>>>> 1.05786, 0.0002, 2.37232, 3.01835, 0, 1.13430, 0.92872,
> >>>>>>>>> 0)), .Names = c("v1", "v2", "v3", "v4"), class = "data.frame",
> >>>>>>>>> row.names =
> >>>>>>>>> c(2L,
> >>>>>>>>> 9L, 11L, 41L, 48L, 50L, 158L, 165L, 167L, 197L, 204L, 206L))
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> # please notice that while the aggregated v4 on v3 has changed …
> >>>>>>>>> aggregate(f1[,c("v4")],list(f1$v3),sum)
> >>>>>>>>> aggregate(f2[,c("v4")],list(f2$v3),sum)
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> # … the aggregated v4 over v1xv2 has remained unchanged:
> >>>>>>>>> aggregate(f1[,c("v4")],list(f1$v1,f1$v2),sum)
> >>>>>>>>> aggregate(f2[,c("v4")],list(f2$v1,f2$v2),sum)
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Thank you very much in advance for your assitance.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Luca
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> 2015-03-21 13:18 GMT+01:00 Bert Gunter <gunter.ber...@gene.com>:
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> 1. Still not sure what you mean, but maybe look at ?ave and
> >>>> ?tapply,
> >>>>>>>>>> for which ave() is a wrapper.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> 2. You still need to heed the rest of Jeff's advice.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Cheers,
> >>>>>>>>>> Bert
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Bert Gunter
> >>>>>>>>>> Genentech Nonclinical Biostatistics
> >>>>>>>>>> (650) 467-7374
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> "Data is not information. Information is not knowledge. And
> >>>> knowledge
> >>>>>>>>>> is certainly not wisdom."
> >>>>>>>>>> Clifford Stoll
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> On Sat, Mar 21, 2015 at 4:53 AM, Luca Meyer <
> >> lucam1...@gmail.com>
> >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>> Hi Jeff & other R-experts,
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Thank you for your note. I have tried myself to solve the
> >> issue
> >>>>>>>>>>> without
> >>>>>>>>>>> success.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Following your suggestion, I am providing a sample of the
> >>>> dataset I
> >>>>>>>>>>> am
> >>>>>>>>>>> using below (also downloadble in plain text from
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >> https://www.dropbox.com/s/qhmpkkrejjkpbkx/sample_code.txt?dl=0):
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> #this is an extract of the overall dataset (n=1200 cases)
> >>>>>>>>>>> f1 <- structure(list(v1 = c("A", "A", "A", "A", "A", "A", "B",
> >>>> "B",
> >>>>>>>>>>> "B", "B", "B", "B"), v2 = c("A", "B", "C", "A", "B", "C", "A",
> >>>>>>>>>>> "B", "C", "A", "B", "C"), v3 = c("B", "B", "B", "C", "C", "C",
> >>>>>>>>>>> "B", "B", "B", "C", "C", "C"), v4 = c(18.1853007621835,
> >>>>>>>>>>> 3.43806581506388,
> >>>>>>>>>>> 0.002733567617055, 1.42917483425029, 1.05786640463504,
> >>>>>>>>>>> 0.000420548864162308,
> >>>>>>>>>>> 2.37232740842861, 3.01835841813241, 0, 1.13430282139936,
> >>>>>>>>>>> 0.928725667117666,
> >>>>>>>>>>> 0)), .Names = c("v1", "v2", "v3", "v4"), class = "data.frame",
> >>>>>>>>>>> row.names
> >>>>>>>>>>> =
> >>>>>>>>>>> c(2L,
> >>>>>>>>>>> 9L, 11L, 41L, 48L, 50L, 158L, 165L, 167L, 197L, 204L, 206L))
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> I need to find a automated procedure that allows me to adjust
> >> v3
> >>>>>>>>>>> marginals
> >>>>>>>>>>> while maintaining v1xv2 marginals unchanged.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> That is: modify the v4 values you can find by running:
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> aggregate(f1[,c("v4")],list(f1$v3),sum)
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> while maintaining costant the values you can find by running:
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> aggregate(f1[,c("v4")],list(f1$v1,f1$v2),sum)
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Now does it make sense?
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Please notice I have tried to build some syntax that tries to
> >>>> modify
> >>>>>>>>>>> values
> >>>>>>>>>>> within each v1xv2 combination by computing sum of v4, row
> >>>> percentage
> >>>>>>>>>>> in
> >>>>>>>>>>> terms of v4, and there is where my effort is blocked. Not
> >> really
> >>>>>>>>>>> sure
> >>>>>>>>>>> how I
> >>>>>>>>>>> should proceed. Any suggestion?
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Luca
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> 2015-03-19 2:38 GMT+01:00 Jeff Newmiller <
> >>>> jdnew...@dcn.davis.ca.us>:
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> I don't understand your description. The standard practice on
> >>>> this
> >>>>>>>>>>>> list
> >>>>>>>>>>>> is
> >>>>>>>>>>>> to provide a reproducible R example [1] of the kind of data
> >> you
> >>>> are
> >>>>>>>>>>>> working
> >>>>>>>>>>>> with (and any code you have tried) to go along with your
> >>>>>>>>>>>> description.
> >>>>>>>>>>>> In
> >>>>>>>>>>>> this case, that would be two dputs of your input data frames
> >>>> and a
> >>>>>>>>>>>> dput
> >>>>>>>>>>>> of
> >>>>>>>>>>>> an output data frame (generated by hand from your input data
> >>>>>>>>>>>> frame).
> >>>>>>>>>>>> (Probably best to not use the full number of input values
> >> just
> >>>> to
> >>>>>>>>>>>> keep
> >>>>>>>>>>>> the
> >>>>>>>>>>>> size down.) We could then make an attempt to generate code
> >> that
> >>>>>>>>>>>> goes
> >>>>>>>>>>>> from
> >>>>>>>>>>>> input to output.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Of course, if you post that hard work using HTML then it will
> >>>> get
> >>>>>>>>>>>> corrupted (much like the text below from your earlier emails)
> >>>> and
> >>>>>>>>>>>> we
> >>>>>>>>>>>> won't
> >>>>>>>>>>>> be able to use it. Please learn to post from your email
> >> software
> >>>>>>>>>>>> using
> >>>>>>>>>>>> plain text when corresponding with this mailing list.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> [1]
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>
> >>
> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/5963269/how-to-make-a-great-r-reproducible-example
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>
> >>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Jeff Newmiller The .....
> >>>> ..... Go
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Live...
> >>>>>>>>>>>> DCN:<jdnew...@dcn.davis.ca.us> Basics: ##.#.
> >> ##.#.
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Live
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Go...
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Live: OO#.. Dead:
> >> OO#..
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Playing
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Research Engineer (Solar/Batteries O.O#.
> >> #.O#.
> >>>>>>>>>>>> with
> >>>>>>>>>>>> /Software/Embedded Controllers) .OO#.
> >> .OO#.
> >>>>>>>>>>>> rocks...1k
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>
> >>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Sent from my phone. Please excuse my brevity.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> On March 18, 2015 9:05:37 AM PDT, Luca Meyer <
> >>>> lucam1...@gmail.com>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks for you input Michael,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> The continuous variable I have measures quantities (down to
> >> the
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 3rd
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> decimal level) so unfortunately are not frequencies.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Any more specific suggestions on how that could be tackled?
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks & kind regards,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Luca
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> ===
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Michael Friendly wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm not sure I understand completely what you want to do,
> >> but
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> if the data were frequencies, it sounds like task for
> >> fitting a
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> loglinear model with the model formula
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> ~ V1*V2 + V3
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/18/2015 2:17 AM, Luca Meyer wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> * Hello,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> *>>* I am facing a quite challenging task (at least to me)
> >> and
> >>>> I
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> was
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> wondering
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> *>* if someone could advise how R could assist me to speed
> >> the
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> task
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> up.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> *>>* I am dealing with a dataset with 3 discrete variables
> >> and
> >>>> one
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> continuous
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> *>* variable. The discrete variables are:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> *>>* V1: 8 modalities
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> *>* V2: 13 modalities
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> *>* V3: 13 modalities
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> *>>* The continuous variable V4 is a decimal number always
> >>>> greater
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> than
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> zero in
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> *>* the marginals of each of the 3 variables but it is
> >>>> sometimes
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> equal
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> to zero
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> *>* (and sometimes negative) in the joint tables.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> *>>* I have got 2 files:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> *>>* => one with distribution of all possible combinations
> >> of
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> V1xV2
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> (some of
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> *>* which are zero or neagtive) and
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> *>* => one with the marginal distribution of V3.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> *>>* I am trying to build the long and narrow dataset
> >> V1xV2xV3
> >>>> in
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> such
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> a way
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> *>* that each V1xV2 cell does not get modified and V3 fits
> >> as
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> closely
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> as
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> *>* possible to its marginal distribution. Does it make
> >> sense?
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> *>>* To be even more specific, my 2 input files look like
> >> the
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> following.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> *>>* FILE 1
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> *>* V1,V2,V4
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> *>* A, A, 24.251
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> *>* A, B, 1.065
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> *>* (...)
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> *>* B, C, 0.294
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> *>* B, D, 2.731
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> *>* (...)
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> *>* H, L, 0.345
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> *>* H, M, 0.000
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> *>>* FILE 2
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> *>* V3, V4
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> *>* A, 1.575
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> *>* B, 4.294
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> *>* C, 10.044
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> *>* (...)
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> *>* L, 5.123
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> *>* M, 3.334
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> *>>* What I need to achieve is a file such as the following
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> *>>* FILE 3
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> *>* V1, V2, V3, V4
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> *>* A, A, A, ???
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> *>* A, A, B, ???
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> *>* (...)
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> *>* D, D, E, ???
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> *>* D, D, F, ???
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> *>* (...)
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> *>* H, M, L, ???
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> *>* H, M, M, ???
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> *>>* Please notice that FILE 3 need to be such that if I
> >>>> aggregate
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> on
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> V1+V2 I
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> *>* recover exactly FILE 1 and that if I aggregate on V3 I
> >> can
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> recover
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> a file
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> *>* as close as possible to FILE 3 (ideally the same file).
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> *>>* Can anyone suggest how I could do that with R?
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> *>>* Thank you very much indeed for any assistance you are
> >>>> able to
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> provide.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> *>>* Kind regards,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> *>>* Luca*
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> [[alternative HTML version deleted]]
>
>
> David Winsemius
> Alameda, CA, USA
>
>
[[alternative HTML version deleted]]
______________________________________________
R-help@r-project.org mailing list -- To UNSUBSCRIBE and more, see
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help
PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html
and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.
