> I think what you're seeing is
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loss_of_significance.
Almost.
All the results in the OP's summary are reflections of finite precision in the
analytically exact solution, leading to residuals smaller than the double
precision limit. The summary is correctly warning that it's all potentially
nonsense, and indeed the only things you can trust are the coefficient values
(to within .Machine$double.eps or thereabouts)
Interestingly, though, my current version of R (3.4.0) gives numerically exact
coefficients (c(1,0) and identically zero standard errors.
So this particular example is apparently version-specific.
S Ellison
*******************************************************************
This email and any attachments are confidential. Any use...{{dropped:8}}
______________________________________________
R-help@r-project.org mailing list -- To UNSUBSCRIBE and more, see
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.
