15 Apr
2008
15 Apr
'08
8:27 p.m.
Yes you can use PP IFF (so that's if and ONLY if) you send us your slides by
Wednesday midnight so we can fit them into the slideshow with the abstracts.
But remember that you only have three minutes!
j.
From: Jose Luis Romo Cruz [mailto:jose_luis_romo at ksg08.harvard.edu]
Sent: Tuesday, April 15, 2008 8:00 PM
To: jhainmueller at gmail.com; jmlarson at fas.harvard.edu
Cc: viridianarios at gmail.com
Subject: Abstract and Title
Hi,
Attached you will find our abstract and title of our article. We have some
results that we would like to present to the group. Can we use Power Point?
Thanks a lot
Jose Luis Romo Cruz
Harvard University | Kennedy School of Government
Master in Public Policy 2008
(857) 233 7289
jose_luis_romo at ksg08.harvard.edu
16 Apr
16 Apr
10:03 a.m.
New subject: [gov2001-l] to zelig or not to zelig
That is a catchy email title! I bet it made you all want to keep reading...
So, on number 1, part 2, I note that the wording of the question has changed,
now permitting the use of zelig to generate expected probabilities? Colin
Brown tells me there is a correction necessary to take the square root of the
inverse negative hessian when it has negative elements. I've been getting NaN
warnings. I'd be curious to know what the correction is, even if zelig is now
kosher.
Thanks,
--rich
10:28 a.m.
New subject: [gov2001-l] to zelig or not to zelig
Rich,
If you want to do the predictions manually, I suggest coding up the whole
thing manually. in zelig the parameterization from the model is slightly
different so you don't know (unless you dig into the source code or ask
them) what the order preserving transformation is that they use for the
thresholds. You need this transformation in the simulations. Simply drawing
taus from the zelig based hessian will lead to samples where they are out of
order. You can try to fix this, but it's much easier to do the whole model
on your own so you you know which order preserving transformation you used
so you can do the same in the simulations.
Hth,
jens
-----Original Message-----
From: gov2001-l-bounces at lists.fas.harvard.edu [mailto:gov2001-l-
bounces at lists.fas.harvard.edu] On Behalf Of Richard Alexander Nielsen
Sent: Wednesday, April 16, 2008 10:03 AM
To: gov2001-l at lists.fas.harvard.edu
Subject: [gov2001-l] to zelig or not to zelig
That is a catchy email title! I bet it made you all want to keep
reading...
So, on number 1, part 2, I note that the wording of the question has
changed,
now permitting the use of zelig to generate expected probabilities?
Colin
Brown tells me there is a correction necessary to take the square root
of the
inverse negative hessian when it has negative elements. I've been
getting NaN
warnings. I'd be curious to know what the correction is, even if zelig
is now
kosher.
Thanks,
--rich
_______________________________________________
gov2001-l mailing list
gov2001-l at lists.fas.harvard.edu
http://lists.fas.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/gov2001-l
5876
days inactive
5876
days old
gov2001@lists.gking.harvard.edu
2 comments
2 participants
participants (2)
-
jhainmueller＠gmail.com -
rnielsen＠fas.harvard.edu