Notice: On April 23, 2014, Statalist moved from an email list to a forum, based at statalist.org.

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

From |
Nick Cox <njcoxstata@gmail.com> |

To |
statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu |

Subject |
Re: st: Loop-within-loop error while looping over observations for a microsimulation |

Date |
Tue, 7 Aug 2012 19:09:31 +0100 |

Sorry, but I have only incomplete understanding of what you are trying to do and can only comment in limited ways. 1. I don't see how your code leads to "XY" being printed. 2. The extra -capture-s here do no harm, but why do you think they are necessary? -capture- has as its main role catching things that can go wrong with the data; it does not serve well if used to try to save programmers from their own bugs. 3. I have hinted before and second time round I will be blunter: The use of .f and .i here looks as if you are trying to pack information better stored as two variables in one variable. At a wild guess this may be behind your difficulties, but I can't make that concrete. Nick On Tue, Aug 7, 2012 at 4:10 PM, Stephen Cranney <cranney.stephen@gmail.com> wrote: > Okay, I so I fixed the problems mentioned. I get an "invalid inXY" > reading the first observation after the first birth and the rest stay > as .f When I run the command with capture I get a series of 1s and 0s > but without any of the postpartum replacements with .i. > > local N = _N > local monthsofpostpartum = 12 > forvalues i = 1/`N' { > forvalues j= 1/`monthsofpostpartum' { > capture if childbirth[`i']== .f replace childbirth = > rbinomial(1, probabilityconceive) in `i' > local k = `i' + `j' > capture if childbirth[`i']==1 replace childbirth= .i in`k' > } > } > > On Tue, Aug 7, 2012 at 4:09 AM, Nick Cox <njcoxstata@gmail.com> wrote: >> I am surprised at your syntax >> >> ... in `N'+`j' >> >> as I didn't know that Stata would do the mathematics there. But >> regardless of that, observation `N' + `j' is at position _N + 1 ... _N >> + 12 and so always outside your dataset, so nothing would be done Your >> logic appears to call for >> >> local k = `i' + `j' >> if childbirth[`i']==1 replace childbirth= .i in`k' >> >> I note also that >> >> if childbirth[`i']== .f replace childbirth= rbinomial(1, >> probabilityconceive) >> >> -replace-s in every observation, including those earlier declared >> times when infertile. That can't be what you intend, so you need to >> specify -in- here too. >> >> That said, I don't see that you need to reach for the exotic machinery >> of extended missing values. Infertility post partum would seem to be >> represented naturally by 0; the value is known and zero, and for a >> specific reason, not unknown for a specific reason. >> >> Nick >> >> On Tue, Aug 7, 2012 at 12:31 AM, Stephen Cranney >> <cranney.stephen@gmail.com> wrote: >>> Thank you all so much, that worked to make the syntax legal. I'm >>> almost there, but it's not quite doing what I want it to. To recap, >>> the data is sorted by year and month. When the "birth" is created out >>> of the binomial function, I want the code to detect it and make a >>> number of the subsequent months "infertile" so that binomial >>> probability of births won't work during those months. .f= fertile >>> missing, .i is missing for after-birth infertility. >>> "monthsofpostpartum" is a local macro that is simply the number of >>> months of after-birth infertility. This just gives me a sequence of 1s >>> and 0s; it doesn't seem to be replacing the subsequent months after >>> birth with the .i >>> >>> local N = _N >>> local monthsofpostpartum = 12 >>> forvalues i = 1/`N' { >>> forvalues j= 1/`monthsofpostpartum' { >>> if childbirth[`i']== .f replace childbirth= rbinomial(1, probabilityconceive) >>> if childbirth[`i']==1 replace childbirth= .i in`N'+`j' >>> } >>> } >>> >>> Thanks in advance, >>> >>> >>> >>> On Mon, Aug 6, 2012 at 1:45 PM, Nick Cox <njcoxstata@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> You still have a problem. >>>> >>>> replace childbirth[_n+j]== .i if (childbirth==1) in `i' >>>> >>>> is illegal, as explained. >>>> >>>> This kind of statement would be legal >>>> >>>> if (childbirth[<subscript>] == 1) replace childbirth = .i in <something> >>>> >>>> but I am not certain that it is what you want. >>>> >>>> On Mon, Aug 6, 2012 at 8:08 PM, Stephen Cranney >>>> <cranney.stephen@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> But with the current syntax isn't that not a problem? If I input the >>>>> numbers directly I have the following: >>>>> >>>>> local N = _N >>>>> forvalues i = 1/`N' { >>>>> forvalues j= 0/12 { >>>>> >>>>> replace childbirth= rbinomial(1, probabilityconceive) >>>>> if childbirth== .f >>>>> replace childbirth[_n+j]== .i if (childbirth==1) in `i' >>>>> } >>>>> } >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Here 1/`N' is directly computed before the loop starts, and the j >>>>> values are inputted directly (with the higher bound being the number >>>>> of postpartum months), so I'm still not seeing exactly how the syntax >>>>> has a problem. I've closed off the space that was between childbirth >>>>> and the _n, so it's not that it's accidentally recognizing the value >>>>> as a weight. >>>>> >>>>> Thanks, >>>>> >>>>> Stephen >>>>> >>>>> On Mon, Aug 6, 2012 at 11:59 AM, Nick Cox <njcoxstata@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> No "seems to indicate" here: simply, subscripts are not allowed to the >>>>>> left of the assignment in Stata. >>>>>> >>>>>> The syntax diagram shows the form -replace oldvar = exp-. Stuff can >>>>>> follow that, but nothing else can be included. >>>>>> >>>>>> Nick >>>>>> >>>>>> On Mon, Aug 6, 2012 at 4:53 PM, Stephen Cranney >>>>>> <cranney.stephen@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>> > Thanks for catching that; it's still giving me the "weights not >>>>>> > allowed" error message though, even when I delete the extra space. >>>>>> > >>>>>> > I found this prior Statlist post that seems to indicate that Stata >>>>>> > triggers the no weights allowed warning when the `i' is placed to the >>>>>> > left of the equals sign: >>>>>> > >>>>>> > http://www.stata.com/statalist/archive/2006-08/msg00976.html >>>>>> > >>>>>> > So I changed my code to the following, but I'm still getting the "no >>>>>> > weights allowed" message. >>>>>> > >>>>>> > local N = _N >>>>>> > forvalues i = 1/`N' { >>>>>> > forvalues j= 0/12 { >>>>>> > replace childbirth= rbinomial(1, probabilityconceive) if childbirth== .f >>>>>> > replace childbirth[_n+j]== .i if (childbirth==1) in `i' >>>>>> > } >>>>>> > } >>>>>> > >>>>>> > Best, >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > On Mon, Aug 6, 2012 at 9:32 AM, daniel klein >>>>>> > <klein.daniel.81@googlemail.com> wrote: >>>>>> >> I did not follow closely, but there is a space between <childbirth> >>>>>> >> and <[`i']> in your code, probably causing Stata to interpret <[`i']> >>>>>> >> as some kind of weight, rather than a subscript. >>>>>> >> >>>>>> >> Best >>>>>> >> Daniel >>>>>> >> >>>>>> >> -- >>>>>> >> [...] >>>>>> >> However, when I change the >>>>>> >> monthsofpostpartum variable to a constant (in this case 12), it's >>>>>> >> giving me a "weights not allowed" sign. >>>>>> * * * 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: Loop-within-loop error while looping over observations for a microsimulation***From:*daniel klein <klein.daniel.81@googlemail.com>

**Re: st: Loop-within-loop error while looping over observations for a microsimulation***From:*Stephen Cranney <cranney.stephen@gmail.com>

**Re: st: Loop-within-loop error while looping over observations for a microsimulation***From:*Nick Cox <njcoxstata@gmail.com>

**Re: st: Loop-within-loop error while looping over observations for a microsimulation***From:*Stephen Cranney <cranney.stephen@gmail.com>

**Re: st: Loop-within-loop error while looping over observations for a microsimulation***From:*Nick Cox <njcoxstata@gmail.com>

**Re: st: Loop-within-loop error while looping over observations for a microsimulation***From:*Stephen Cranney <cranney.stephen@gmail.com>

**Re: st: Loop-within-loop error while looping over observations for a microsimulation***From:*Nick Cox <njcoxstata@gmail.com>

**Re: st: Loop-within-loop error while looping over observations for a microsimulation***From:*Stephen Cranney <cranney.stephen@gmail.com>

- Prev by Date:
**Re: st: RE: RE: Does xtreg (or xtivreg) assume equally spaced time points?** - Next by Date:
**st: RE: RE: RE: Does xtreg (or xtivreg) assume equally spaced time points?** - Previous by thread:
**Re: st: Loop-within-loop error while looping over observations for a microsimulation** - Next by thread:
**st: log likelihood test meta-regression** - Index(es):