[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date index][Thread index]

From |
"ddrukker@stata.com" <ddrukker@stata.com> |

To |
"statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu" <statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu> |

Subject |
Re: st: Is there a kind of stochasticity in the execution ofxthtaylor? |

Date |
Thu, 17 Jul 2008 08:25:05 -0700 |

Hewan Belay <hewan_belay@yahoo.com> asked why -xthtaylor- would drop a different variable when -xthtaylor- is run at different times. He also speculated that this was due to a problem with -xthtaylor-. There is no problem with the results produced by -xthtaylor-, which variable is dropped is arbitrary. Changes in the sort order of the data are responsible for this difference. But, it is still surprising when the variables dropped change from run to run. Computers compute in finite precision. Among other things, finite precision mathematics means that changing the order in which a group of numbers are summed can cause minor differences in the computed sum. These minor changes in the computed sum can alter which variable is dropped. Dropping one of a series of perfectly collinear variables is a classic knife-edge computation. In -xthtaylor- the decision is especially complicated because it is made on the basis of transformed variables, not the original variables. In addition, these transforms are computed after sorting the data by the panel-id variable, which is not unique. I suspect that minor differences in the computed transforms are triggering a difference in the knife-edge decision of which variable is dropped. We will change -xthtaylor- so that the sorts on the panel-id variable depend deterministically on the original sort order of the data. This will remove the variation from run to run, unless some other command re-sorts the data in between runs. If Hewan could privately send me the data and a do-file that reproduces the posted example, then I can ensure that the fix addresses the problem at hand. In the meantime, Hewan should simply exclude one of the time dummies to ensure that the same variables are used across runs and samples. David <ddrukker@stata.com> * * For searches and help try: * http://www.stata.com/help.cgi?search * http://www.stata.com/support/statalist/faq * http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/ Privileged, confidential or patient identifiable information may be contained in this message. This information is meant only for the use of the intended recipients. If you are not the intended recipient, or if the message has been addressed to you in error, do not read, disclose, reproduce, distribute, disseminate or otherwise use this transmission. Instead, please notify the sender by reply e-mail, and then destroy all copies of the message and any attachments. * * For searches and help try: * http://www.stata.com/help.cgi?search * http://www.stata.com/support/statalist/faq * http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/

**References**:**Re: st: Is there a kind of stochasticity in the execution of xthtaylor?***From:*Hewan Belay <hewan_belay@yahoo.com>

- Prev by Date:
**Re: st: Is there a kind of stochasticity in the execution of xthtaylor?** - Next by Date:
**Re: st: Is there a kind of stochasticity in the execution ofxthtaylor?** - Previous by thread:
**Re: st: Is there a kind of stochasticity in the execution of xthtaylor?** - Next by thread:
**Re: st: Is there a kind of stochasticity in the execution ofxthtaylor?** - Index(es):

© Copyright 1996–2016 StataCorp LP | Terms of use | Privacy | Contact us | What's new | Site index |