I apologize if this is just a misunderstanding on my part, but I was
under the impression that the intervals returned by co.intervals should
cover all the observations. Yet
x<-1:10
z<-co.intervals(x,overlap=0)
In R, z equals
[,1] [,2]
[1,] 0.5 1.5
[2,] 2.5 3.5
[3,] 3.5 4.5
[4,] 5.5 6.5
[5,] 7.5 8.5
[6,] 8.5 9.5
Note in particular the second and last element of x are not covered by
any of the intervals. In fact S-PLUS gives
[,1] [,2]
[1,] 1 2
[2,] 3 3
[3,] 4 5
[4,] 6 7
[5,] 8 8
[6,] 9 10
Ben
possible bug in co.intervals when overlap=0
2 messages · Benjamin Tyner, Brian Ripley
This happens equally when overlap = 0.5 (the default). Yes, it is a bug. R does xr <- x[r + ii] with fractional r.
On Fri, 15 Dec 2006, Benjamin Tyner wrote:
I apologize if this is just a misunderstanding on my part, but I was
under the impression that the intervals returned by co.intervals should
cover all the observations. Yet
x<-1:10
z<-co.intervals(x,overlap=0)
In R, z equals
[,1] [,2]
[1,] 0.5 1.5
[2,] 2.5 3.5
[3,] 3.5 4.5
[4,] 5.5 6.5
[5,] 7.5 8.5
[6,] 8.5 9.5
Note in particular the second and last element of x are not covered by
any of the intervals. In fact S-PLUS gives
[,1] [,2]
[1,] 1 2
[2,] 3 3
[3,] 4 5
[4,] 6 7
[5,] 8 8
[6,] 9 10
Brian D. Ripley, ripley at stats.ox.ac.uk Professor of Applied Statistics, http://www.stats.ox.ac.uk/~ripley/ University of Oxford, Tel: +44 1865 272861 (self) 1 South Parks Road, +44 1865 272866 (PA) Oxford OX1 3TG, UK Fax: +44 1865 272595