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

From |
"Michael Blasnik" <[email protected]> |

To |
<[email protected]> |

Subject |
Re: implementation of boschloo's test: very slow execution |

Date |
Fri, 22 Feb 2008 14:18:14 -0500 |

...

I have a couple of potential speed imrpovement ideas (besides moving it to Mata):

1) Do you really need to get the p value to 4 decimals? If you changed

qui gen double p = (_n-1)/10001 to qui gen double p = (_n-1)/1001

Then you have a 90% reduction in some of the calculations.

2) I don't know much about this test, but wouldn't the optimum point be a smooth function of p? If that is so, you may want to create an iterative approach to narrowing the range of p. Start with perhaps p ranging by .01. Then just keep the interval on either side of the optimum and reduce the increment to .001. That may reduce the calculations substantially.

3) Don't use tabi. -tabi- requires a preserve and has a lot of ado machinery to set up the desired table. It ends up creating a dataset with RxC observations and a frequency weight variable that contains the counts. You could instead hardwire a 2x2 table with values for row, col, and fw. A loop would then just change the fw values to cycle through all of the n1 and n2 values. You could then use -post- to post the values of p_exact, xx1 and xx2. You may then be able to do the binomial calculation and summation just once on the resulting dastaset.

I'm not sure I understand the algorithm fully enough to be sure how these changes would work or could be optimized and combined, but I wouldn't be suprised with a large speed improvement.

Michael Blasnik

*

* 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/

**References**:**implementation of boschloo's test: very slow execution***From:*"Eva Poen" <[email protected]>

**RE: implementation of boschloo's test: very slow execution***From:*"Nick Cox" <[email protected]>

**Re: implementation of boschloo's test: very slow execution***From:*"Eva Poen" <[email protected]>

**RE: implementation of boschloo's test: very slow execution***From:*"Nick Cox" <[email protected]>

**Re: implementation of boschloo's test: very slow execution***From:*"Eva Poen" <[email protected]>

- Prev by Date:
**st: Marginal effects after log-linear sample selection models** - Next by Date:
**Re: st: running 64bit Sata** - Previous by thread:
**Re: implementation of boschloo's test: very slow execution** - Next by thread:
**Re: implementation of boschloo's test: very slow execution** - Index(es):

© Copyright 1996–2024 StataCorp LLC | Terms of use | Privacy | Contact us | What's new | Site index |