-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 24
New issue
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
Optimize lower and upper bounds separately #367
Comments
(Wow, that is some monster code (to maintain) right there...) I am all for what ever we can do to make the CIs more accurate. I suggest waiting for #366 to be merged, and then you can make what ever changes you want to Sound good? |
Yeah that's what I was thinking |
Alright, we're ready for you now Dr. Wiernik. |
I'm planning on submitting to CRAN when I get back (Sep 1st). Do you think this will be ready by then? |
I'm BACK! @bwiernik , what's up doc? |
Should be able to do this this week I think. Need to catch up on teaching a bit |
I am thinking about this bit from the documentation:
This surprised me, because MBESS doesn't have an issue with it (and neither does Steiger's NDC program for similar situations: https://www.statpower.net/Software.html):
Created on 2021-08-17 by the reprex package (v2.0.0)
I think the issue for us is the simultaneous optimization of the lower and upper limits. I think that might be lowering the effective tolerance for the two values individually. Exploring the various methods in
optim()
, most fail to yield a sensible solution, but"SANN"
gets the correct lower bound, but an incorrect upper bound."Brent"
(unidimensional) gets both limits correct.I am wondering whether we should switch to optimizing the two limits separately using either
optimize()
ornlm()
.MBESS::conf.limits.nct()
uses both and retains the best result:The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: