[R] relative frequency plot

2006-04-27 Thread nlei
Hi All, I want to use hist to get the relative frequency plot. But the range of ylab is greater than 1,which I think it should be less than 1 since it stands for the probability. Here is my code: x-c(1,1,1,0,0,1,1,5,1,1,0,1,1,0,1,0,1,1,0,0,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,4,1,0,2,1,1,1

Re: [R] relative frequency plot

2006-04-27 Thread Peter Dalgaard
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi All, I want to use hist to get the relative frequency plot. But the range of ylab is greater than 1,which I think it should be less than 1 since it stands for the probability. No, it stands for density, as the y label says. The sum of the areas of the bars is

Re: [R] relative frequency plot

2006-04-27 Thread Philipp Pagel
On Thu, Apr 27, 2006 at 10:48:39AM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi All, I want to use hist to get the relative frequency plot. But the range of ylab is greater than 1,which I think it should be less than 1 since it stands for the probability. I'm confused. Could you please help me with

Re: [R] relative frequency plot

2006-04-27 Thread Erik Iverson
See ?truehist in the MASS package. Philipp Pagel wrote: On Thu, Apr 27, 2006 at 10:48:39AM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi All, I want to use hist to get the relative frequency plot. But the range of ylab is greater than 1,which I think it should be less than 1 since it stands for the

Re: [R] relative frequency plot

2006-04-27 Thread Martin Maechler
Erik == Erik Iverson [EMAIL PROTECTED] on Thu, 27 Apr 2006 13:44:16 -0500 writes: Erik See ?truehist in the MASS package. Not in this case! truehist() also computes a density, and its values on the y axis are not probabilities, either! hist(*, freq = FALSE) is fully sufficient here

Re: [R] relative frequency plot

2006-04-27 Thread Erik Iverson
Martin - Of course you are right. The documentation for truehist (and hist) explains that fact nicely, which is why I thought to send him there. Sorry for any confusion. Thanks, Erik Martin Maechler wrote: Erik == Erik Iverson [EMAIL PROTECTED] on Thu, 27 Apr 2006 13:44:16 -0500 writes: