Thanks Ken for your reply. No doubt your english is quite tough!! I understand something is not normal with the 5th explanatory variable (se:2872.17069!) However could not understand what you mean by "You seem to be getting complete separation on X5 "?
Can you please be more elaborate? Thanks, On Thu, Apr 12, 2012 at 4:06 PM, ken knoblauch <ken.knobla...@inserm.fr> wrote: > Christofer Bogaso <bogaso.christofer <at> gmail.com> writes: >> Dear all, I am fitting a LOGIT model on this Data........... > ---- << snip >>--- >> glm(Data[,1] ~ Data[,-1], binomial(link = logit)) >> >> Call: glm(formula = Data[, 1] ~ Data[, -1], family = binomial(link = logit)) >> >> Coefficients: >> (Intercept) Data[, -1]X 1 Data[, -1]X 2 Data[, -1]X 3 Data[, >> -1]X 4 Data[, -1]X 5 >> 10.99326 0.01943 10.61013 -0.66763 >> 70.98785 17.33126 >> >> Degrees of Freedom: 43 Total (i.e. Null); 38 Residual >> Null Deviance: 44.58 >> Residual Deviance: 17.46 AIC: 29.46 >> Warning message: >> glm.fit: fitted probabilities numerically 0 or 1 occurred >> >> However I am getting a warning mesage as "fitted probabilities >> numerically 0 or 1 occurred". Here my question is, > have I made any >> mistakes with my above implementation? I > s it just because, I have too >> less number of '0' in my response Variable? >> > Look at the output of summary, especially the standard errors. > You seem to be getting complete > separation on X5 and X4 doesn,'t look so hot either. > > Ken > > ______________________________________________ > R-help@r-project.org mailing list > https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help > PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html > and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code. ______________________________________________ R-help@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.
