Skip to content

Question about LM test for residual autocorrelation in R

5 messages · Dongwoo Kang, Hodgess, Erin, Michael Blows +1 more

#
Hi Dongwoo:

I tried the following example:
[1] "type"            "rho"             "coefficients"    "rest.se"        
 [5] "LL"              "s2"              "SSE"             "parameters"     
 [9] "logLik_lm.model" "AIC_lm.model"    "method"          "call"           
[13] "residuals"       "opt"             "tarX"            "tary"           
[17] "y"               "X"               "fitted.values"   "se.fit"         
[21] "similar"         "ase"             "rho.se"          "LMtest"         
[25] "resvar"          "zero.policy"     "aliased"         "listw_style"    
[29] "interval"        "fdHess"          "optimHess"       "insert"         
[33] "trs"             "LLNullLlm"       "timings"         "f_calls"        
[37] "hf_calls"        "intern_classic"  "coeftitle"       "Coef"           
[41] "NK"              "Wald1"           "correlation"     "correltext"     
[45] "LR1"
[,1]
[1,] 0.2891926
and it does indeed have the LMtest result.

Or were you looking for the formula, please?

Thanks,
Erin
#
Sorry...answered the wrong question

How do you generate the SER models, please?
1 day later
#
On Tue, 9 Jul 2013, Michael Blows wrote:

            
Please read the references, where this is explained - why would you expect 
them to be integer when weighted proportions of observations are being 
used for each fit point? The print method for fitted gwr objects reports 
two versions of effective degrees of freedom if the hat matrix is 
computed, one complete, the other an approximation used in the 2002 GWR 
book, but these non-integer numbers are also based on assumptions.
Please only post plain text!

Roger