Message-ID: <495B3AF2.4030901@statistik.tu-dortmund.de>
Date: 2008-12-31T09:27:14Z
From: Uwe Ligges
Subject: WinBUGS posterior samples (via R2WinBUGS)?
In-Reply-To: <eec05c2a0812302242t3362a13fx8fb1724f9c92c2d6@mail.gmail.com>
3 comments:
1. Quoting the last lines of this message:
"PLEASE do read the posting guide
http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html
and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code."
Otherwise we cannot help anyway.
2. This is not the BUGS mailing list.
3. I do prefer BRugs, the R package that is based on OpenBUGS, because
it is closer to BUGS, more flexible, sometimes easier to debug, ....
Best wishes,
Uwe Ligges
Anny Huang wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I did some analysis using package R2WinBUGS to call WinBUGS. I set the
> iterations to 50000 (fairly a large number, I think), but after the program
> was done, the effective posterior samples contained only 7 draws. I don't
> know why.
>
> By the way, I checked posterior sample size by using bugsobj$n.sims. And,
> for my previous practice with WinBUGS/R2WinBUGS, no such strange thing
> happend. Does anybody have some idea on what might be wrong with my model or
> whatever part in this program? Appreciate it.
>
> Anny
>
> [[alternative HTML version deleted]]
>
> ______________________________________________
> R-help at r-project.org mailing list
> 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.