We read every piece of feedback, and take your input very seriously.
To see all available qualifiers, see our documentation.
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
glm
Does it make sense that glm(X, y, ...) passes here, but glm(formula, data, ...) fails?
glm(X, y, ...)
glm(formula, data, ...)
julia> using GLM julia> data = (a = [1, 4, 9], b = [2, 5, 7], c = [3, 6, 11], y = [1, 1, 0]) (a = [1, 4, 9], b = [2, 5, 7], c = [3, 6, 11], y = [1, 1, 0]) julia> X = [data.a data.b data.c] 3×3 Matrix{Int64}: 1 2 3 4 5 6 9 7 11 julia> glm(X, data.y, Bernoulli(), LogitLink()); julia> form = @formula(y ~ a + b + c); julia> glm(form, data, Bernoulli(), LogitLink()); ERROR: PosDefException: matrix is not positive definite; Cholesky factorization failed. [...]
Version: GLM v1.5.1
GLM v1.5.1
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
The formula based version adds a constant so the two are not equivalent.
Sorry, something went wrong.
No branches or pull requests
Does it make sense that
glm(X, y, ...)
passes here, butglm(formula, data, ...)
fails?Version:
GLM v1.5.1
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: