[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date index][Thread index]
st: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Using -collapse- extensively to find historical, irregular matches: Better way?
Should be _n - 1, not _N - 1.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: email@example.com
> [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]On Behalf Of Nick Cox
> Sent: 30 September 2003 16:59
> To: email@example.com
> Subject: st: RE: RE: RE: RE: Using -collapse- extensively to find
> historical, irregular matches: Better way?
> Chih-Mao Hsieh
> > I had been shying away from converting "cited" to
> > strings because the numbers are in the millions, i.e.
> > strings would be length 7. Many of the "citing" patents
> > have more than 35-40 "cited" patents, and so the
> > concatenation might surpass the string's length limit.
> > Of course, the chances are not high that two patents
> > would match each other over the first 35 patents, so your
> > way does appear to be better.
> Another way is to -reshape-, something
> like this:
> bysort citing (cited) : gen j = _n
> reshape wide cited, i(citing) j(j)
> bysort cited* (citing) : gen counter = _N - 1
> At this moment, I think that's a lot better
> than my earlier suggestions.
> * For searches and help try:
> * http://www.stata.com/support/faqs/res/findit.html
> * http://www.stata.com/support/statalist/faq
> * http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/
* For searches and help try: