Notice: On March 31, it was announced that Statalist is moving from an email list to a forum. The old list will shut down on April 23, and its replacement, statalist.org is already up and running.

# Re: st: FW: ML for logit/ologit

 From Yuval Arbel To statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu Subject Re: st: FW: ML for logit/ologit Date Wed, 16 Nov 2011 12:58:42 +0200

```Nick,

Obviously, my advice is based on my own subjective experience. I
personally finds the work in MATLAB more convenient in the cases that
I have to define non-linear functions - and I even published a paper
with non-linear procedures I ran on MATLAB. I believe that the wisdom
is to exploit the specific advantages of each statistical package.
There are many other cases where I prefer working with STATA.

Moreover, if the bug is not a syntax error - I believe this is a very
serious bug - because it means the program does not know to identify
the very basic sign of power

On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 12:27 PM, Jennyfer Wolf
> Dear all,
> I am working with the nl-function and with the logistic function model log 4.
> Could somebody please explain me why I do not get the same outout if I type:
>
> 1. nl log4: VAR1 VAR2 if VAR3=="xxx"
>
> and
>
> 2. nl(VAR1={b0}+{b1}/(1+exp(-{b2}*(VAR2-{b3}))) if VAR3=="xxx")
>
> Actually 1. should just be an abbreviation of 2.?
> If I run command 1, I get estimates for b0, b1, b2, b3, if I run
> command 2 I only get an estimate for b0 and b1-b3 are 0.
>
> Could somebody explain how to write the formula "in full" (like in
> 2.), to get the same results as in the first formula.
>
> Thank you very much!
> Jennyfer
> *
> *   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/
>

--
Dr. Yuval Arbel