Re: [R] data manipulation

From: Yoko Nakajima <Yoko_Nakajima_at_brown.edu>
Date: Sun 24 Apr 2005 - 07:13:22 EST

Hello,

may I ask a further question?

I have realized that "data <-
matrix(scan("file-name"), ncol=29)" will read the data differently than I thought, i.e., (4,1) is the first column, (17,1) is the second column, and (1,1) is the third and so on by this code - please see the data below. Therefore, the data set I have would not be in order if I used this code.

It needed to be read as: (4.4) first column, (1,1) the second column, and (17, 17) is the third and so on (i.e., from 4 to 0.5611 makes the first row and another 4 to 0.5611 makes the second row and so on). So,

V1 V2 V3 ... V29
4 1 17 ... 0.5611
4 1 17 ... 0.5611

was needed.

(Now I have ,

V1 V2 V3  ....         V29
4    17   1           ...  0.6578

1 1 -5.1536 ... 0.5611)

[The data set I have may have around 1000 sets of them (29 variables times around 1000 sets of these 29 variables). I only paste here two sets of them.]
4 1 17 1 1
-5.1536 -0.1668 -2.3412 -0.5062 0.9621 0.3640 0.3678
-0.5081 -0.2227

0.8142 -0.0389 -0.0445 -0.0578 -0.1175 -0.1232 0.8673
-0.1033 -0.0796
-0.0341 -0.1716 -0.1801 -0.7014 0.6578 0.5611

4 1 17 2 1
-5.1536 -0.1668 -2.3412 -0.5062 0.9621 0.3640 0.3678
-0.5081 -0.2227

0.8142 -0.0389 -0.0445 -0.0578 -0.1175 -0.1232 0.8673
-0.1033 -0.0796
-0.0341 -0.1716 -0.1801 -0.7014 0.6578 0.5611

I need 29 columns. This is true. But the data was read differently by "ncol=29". Is there any way I can handle this problem by R?

I would very appreciate it if you could let me know. My guess is that I should probably rearrange the data set by excel etc.. I have used "data.entry(data)" and found this. I can not analyze this data set.

Thank you very much, in advance.
Sincerely,
Yoko.



R-help@stat.math.ethz.ch mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help PLEASE do read the posting guide! http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html Received on Sun Apr 24 07:17:54 2005

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Fri 03 Mar 2006 - 03:31:25 EST