Usually we use the following statement
model y/n = block variety / dist=binomial solution;
However, if I have already calculate proprtion=y/n by EXCEL and directly use "proportion" into SAS. i.e
model proportion = block variety /dist=binomial solution;
I get the same result.
However, is there anything wrong with my second code?
You are suppose to get the same result as you have said too. So it is not clear what went wrong with your code!
Related
I have a dataset with fields targeted and opens and I need to add calculated field opens per targeted which essentially means doing simple devision of those 2 values.
My calculated field is as follows
{opens}/{targeted}
but then displaying simple table with values they are completely incorrect
If I try any other operator like + * etc calculations are correct.
I'm completely out of ideas on how to debug this. I've simplified the dataset to just columns of targeted and opens, can't get any simpler.
Had the same problem, I fixed it by wrapping the columns with the sum() function. Like this:
sum({opens})/sum({targeted})
I think you need to make AWS understand that you are working with float numbers.
1.0*{opens}/{targeted}
if still not working try also
(1.0*{opens})/({targeted}*1.0)
it should give you the desired output (not tested, let me know if it doesnt work)
Apologies up front, this is going to take a second to explain but I'd rather be thorough so the problem is clear. The main problem that I am having is that people are not being properly filtered out of a matrix that I am using and I believe I have isolated the problem to some measures that I have written. Below is a picture of what I'm working with (I guess you'll have to follow the link):
My problem is that when I try to apply a filter using the slicer, you would expect the available names to be filtered out of the matrix based on if they fall under the particular team leader or director selected. However, they do not, as seen in this picture:
Clearly, people are not being filtered out because there are still values in the AnswerRatePass column and the SurveyScorePass column. I will focus on just AnswerRatePass to cut the problem in half. The purpose of AnswerRatePass is to output text to identify if the Answer Rate of a person exceeded their goal, met the goal, or missed the goal. My code for AnswerRatePass is:
AnswerRatePass = if([AnswerRateGoal] = 1,"Exceed",
if([AnswerRateGoal]=0,"Achieved","Missed"))
As you surely noticed, [AnswerRatePass] is using the value of [AnswerRateGoal] to determine what to do. I use this because it sort of simplifies the code for my Recommendation measure, which assesses if a person met their goals for both criteria, meaning we suggest to promote this person, or what their case is. My code for AnswerRateGoal is:
AnswerRateGoal =
if(ISBLANK([AnswerRate]),0,
if(values(TMD[Title])="Executive",
if([AnswerRate]>=.94,1,
if([AnswerRate]>=.92,0,-1)),
if(values(TMD[Title])="President's Club",
if([AnswerRate]>=.96,1,
if([AnswerRate]>=.94,0,-1)),
if([AnswerRate]>=.96,0,-1)
)))
If these measures (AnswerRatePass, SurveyScorePass, and Recommendation) are removed from the matrix, the slicers work exactly as expected. So, long story short, what I'm pretty sure I need is some sort of filter for these measures so that these values will disappear when using a slicer that doesn't apply to that person, allowing the individual person to also be filtered out by the slicer as well. Unless someone has a different idea, I'm pretty sure that's what I need but I haven't been able to come up with a way to do it. I'm open to any help/suggestions.
Yep, I've seen this before. I think what you want is for AnswerRatePass to return a blank if AnswerRate is blank. Try something like this:
AnswerRatePass =
IF(
ISBLANK([AnswerRate]),
BLANK(),
IF(
[AnswerRateGoal] = 1,
"Exceed",
IF(
[AnswerRateGoal] = 0,
"Achieved",
"Missed"
)
)
)
Side note: The SWITCH function is often a cleaner approach then nested IF functions.
In Stata, is there a way to redirect the data that a command does into a table instead of a graph?
Example: if someone created a normal probability distribution of data with the pnorm var_name command, is there a way to redirect the data so that instead of appearing in a graph, it appears in a table?
To add to #Noobie's answer:
Different commands work in different ways. There's no better short summary.
What you can look out for includes
generate() options that produce new variables. (There is absolute rule that the options have this name, but that or a similar name is the most common single variety.)
Options that allow saving results to new datasets.
Saved results, especially those visible after return list or ereturn list. These can be quite elaborate, e.g. saving of matrices of counts after tabulate.
More broadly, Stata commands aren't functions! One characteristic of a function, as so named in many languages or programs, is that there is a result, with special cases where the result is void or null. There clearly are statistical programs which in broad terms hinge on calling functions which have results, and what you see displayed is often a side-effect of that. Stata commands don't work like that in the sense that the results of a program can be various. In the case of commands designed just to show something, the "result" may be a display. It's worth noting that Mata, which underlies and underpins Stata, is more recognisably a C-like language, with (e.g.) many matrix extensions, which is based on functions (and much else).
Yes and no. It really depends on the command you are using. You should look at the help files first.
For instance, pnorm does not allow that. You can create the data yourself using the formula for pnorm described in the help file, where the cumulative distribution at some point is plotted against the so-called plotting position.
Other Stata commands allow you to generate the points directly. This is the case for kdensity for instance.
I'm trying to save output from several hundred eststo's storing results of bivariate probability models into one excel file using esttab. It works for xtlogit(both ,re and ,pa), xtprobit (both ,re and ,pa) and for the linear probability model xtreg (both standard and ,fe. However, when I use xtreg y x i.year, fe I get the error message too many base levels specified. Google doesn't help me much.
I've been trying for an hour to create a reproducible example but the stata datasets all work fine. It does not seem to be due to the number of years or the fact that different specifications have data for different years. Still, the normal xtreg, fe' works, the problem only appears with time dummies. The weirdest thing is that it works for all subsets of my variables but not for the whole list (again just the time fixed effects specifications).
Does anyone have an idea how to proceed? Using drop(*.year) works whenever the problem does not arise (so in specifications where it works, I get outputs without the year dummies) but does not prevent the too many base levels specified error; ,nobaselevels has no apparent effect as well. Is there a way to remove the time fixed effects from eststo before I pass those on to esttab? Any workaround would be appreciated as well.
The problem you might be facing is that of Stata creating different base levels for the factor variable year, in different regressions.
Try fixing the factor variable base level beforehand with fvset:
fvset base <some_number> year
Check help fvset and the manual entry for details. Also, read the source given below, which contains more information.
Source: two posts from Statalist; one from Tim Wade and another by Jeff Pitblado.
I’m pretty new with do loops in SAS and I know that I am trying to make this loop work like a MATLAB script. I haven’t found many helpful tips online as most of the do-loop examples are just for calculations, not actually checking to see if the row before the current one has the same value.
Here is my issue that I need to solve:
I want to look at each policy numbers below and see if the one before is the same, if it is, I want to flag it.
Policy
26X0118907
26X0375309
26X0375309
26X0527509
I would consider i=1 to be the first policy(26X0118907) and i=2 to be the second policy (26X0375309).
In this case according to the code (that doesn't work) below this increment would be flagged as ‘B’. Do you know how to properly code a situation like this?
data AF_Inforce_&thestate.;
set AF_Inforce_&thestate.;
by Rating_St;
if first.Rating_St then counter=0;
counter+1;
myloop:
do i=2 to counter;
P2(i)=Policy(i);
P1(i)=Policy(i-1);
if P1(i)=P2(i) then flag='A';
else flag='B';
end;
return;
run;
The first thing you need to learn coming from MATLAB or a similar language is that SAS is different. In particular, the DATA step is its own DO loop, looping over records.
Second, it's a bit complicated to access data accross rows. However, there are a few tricks.
Vasja showed you one (lag, which doesn't actually go to a previous record, but sort of acts like it does). dif does the same thing except it compares, so if your policynum had been numeric, Vasja's code could be rewritten as dif(policy)=0 instead of policy=lag(policy)(though this is only for numerics).
A better trick in my opinion in your case is to use by group processing. Normally this works with sorted fields, but here it doesn't matter if it's sorted: you just want to know if two consecutive rows are identical, right?
data want;
set have;
by rating_st policy notsorted;
if first.policy and last.policy then recflag='A';
else if first.rating_st then recflag='A';
else recflag='B';
run;
I don't know that I understand your rules entirely, but they're probably going to be some form of this. I put the two possibilities there, you might just want the second one (ie, you don't care if it's singular or just the first). The first would flag only singular policies.
Try looking at LAG function (it "remembers" the values of a variable in a queue)
Your code should go like this:
data AF_Inforce_&thestate.;
set AF_Inforce_&thestate.;
by Rating_St;
if first.Rating_St = 0 and Policy=LAG(Policy) then flag='A';
else flag='B';
run;