Bookmark and Share

Notice: On March 31, it was announced that Statalist is moving from an email list to a forum. The old list will shut down at the end of May, and its replacement, statalist.org is already up and running.


[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: st: Imputing, interpolating, or otherwise finding missing data?


From   Maarten buis <maartenbuis@yahoo.co.uk>
To   statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu
Subject   Re: st: Imputing, interpolating, or otherwise finding missing data?
Date   Wed, 30 Jun 2010 22:50:29 -0700 (PDT)

--- On Thu, 1/7/10, L Robinson <lysistrataphobia@yahoo.ca> wrote:
> I have a dependent variable that nicely follows the
> equation y=-91.78*ln(x) + 
> 433.73. y is a growth rate, x is time(1,2,3, etc). 
> 
> I can't seem to find a way to incorporate the values of this
> equation into either ipolate or ice.

-ice- needs to estimate that equation, as it implements a 
technique called Multiple Imputation, which requires that 
you not only add some noice around the predictions to represent 
uncertainty due to the error term, but also some noice to 
represent uncertainty in the parameter estimates. So in -ice-
you should not be able to fix the parameters. However, this
noice representing the uncertainty in the parameters is
usualy small compared to the uncertainty in the error term,
so I would just use -ice- in the regular way.

Hope this helps,
Maarten

--------------------------
Maarten L. Buis
Institut fuer Soziologie
Universitaet Tuebingen
Wilhelmstrasse 36
72074 Tuebingen
Germany

http://www.maartenbuis.nl
--------------------------


      

*
*   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/


© Copyright 1996–2014 StataCorp LP   |   Terms of use   |   Privacy   |   Contact us   |   Site index