Syntax for counting cases - spss

I work with SPSS and have difficulty finding/generating a syntax for counting cases.
I have about 120 cases and five variables. I need to know the count /proportion of cases where just one, more than one, or all of the cases have a value of 1 (dichotomous variable). Then I need to compute a new variable that shows the number / proportion of cases which include all of the aforementioned cases (also dichotomous).
For example case number one: var1=1, var2=1, var3=1, var4=0, var5=0 --> newvariable=1.
Case number two: var1=0, var2=0, var3=0, var4=0, var5=0 --> newvariable=1.
And so on...
Can anybody help me with a syntax?
Help would much appreciated!

Here we can use the sum of the variables to determine your conditions. So using a scratch variable that is the sum, we can see if it is equal to 1, more than 1 or 5 in your example.
compute #sum = SUM(var1 to var5).
compute just_one = (#sum = 1).
compute more_one = (#sum > 1).
compute all_one = (#sum = 5).
Similarly, all_one could be computed using the ANY command to evaluate if any zeroes exist, i.e. compute all_one = ANY(0,var1 to var5).. These code snippets assume that var1 to var5 are contiguous in the data frame, if not they just need to be replaced with var1,var2,var3,var4,var5 in all given instances.

You could read up on the logical function ANY in the Command Syntax Reference manual, if you negated a test for ANY with "0", then that is effectively a test for all "1"s. Use of the COUNT command would be another approach.

Related

Multiple OR conditions within DO IF framework evaluating as SYSMIS

I'm trying to create a new variable that generates a "1" for a case if that case selected "1" in any variable in a series of other variables. However, trying the below code evaluates every case to a SYSMIS, even though some respondents have selected "1" in a variable in the reference series of variables.
I tried using a DO IF structure with two ELSE IF's, but no joy.
Here's what I tried so far (the variables in the reference series can take on a "1" (the desired value) a "0", or a "998"):
*ELA dichotomous*
DO IF (w1t_gr1.2=1 OR
w1t_gr2.2=1 OR
w1t_gr3.2=1 OR
w1t_gr3.2=1 OR
w1t_gr4.2=1 OR
w1t_gr5.2=1 OR
w1t_gr6.2=1 OR
w1t_gr7.2=1 OR
w1t_gr8.2=1).
COMPUTE rw1t_ela=1.
ELSE IF (w1t_gr1.2=0 OR
w1t_gr2.2=0 OR
w1t_gr3.2=0 OR
w1t_gr3.2=0 OR
w1t_gr4.2=0 OR
w1t_gr5.2=0 OR
w1t_gr6.2=0 OR
w1t_gr7.2=0 OR
w1t_gr8.2=0).
COMPUTE rw1t_ela=0.
ELSE IF (w1t_gr1.2=998 OR
w1t_gr2.2=998 OR
w1t_gr3.2=998 OR
w1t_gr3.2=998 OR
w1t_gr4.2=998 OR
w1t_gr5.2=998 OR
w1t_gr6.2=998 OR
w1t_gr7.2=998 OR
w1t_gr8.2=998).
COMPUTE rw1t_art=0.
ELSE.
COMPUTE rw1t_art=0.
END IF.
EXECUTE.
I expected this to give a "1" for anyone who selected a "1" in any of the reference series of variables (e.g., in w1t_gr3.2), but every case evaluates to SYSMIS.
The syntax you posted creates two variables, rw1t_ela should actually work like you described, and the second variable rw1t_art should be missing for all cases where any of the eight original variables contains 0 or 1.
If you replace rw1t_art with rw1t_ela in your syntax, it should work well.
That being said, there is a more efficient way to do what you need:
The following code will give you a value of 1 in rw1t_ela only when one of the other variables contains 1, and 0 in all other cases:
compute rw1t_ela=any(1, w1t_gr1.2, w1t_gr2.2, w1t_gr3.2, w1t_gr4.2,
w1t_gr5.2, w1t_gr6.2, w1t_gr7.2, w1t_gr8.2).

How to create a dummy variable

I'm working in a project that uses the IBM SPSS but I had some problems to set a dummy variable(binary variable).The process to get the variable is following : Consider an any variable(width for example), to get the dummy variable, we need
to sort this variable in the decreasing way; The next step is make a somatory of the cases until a limit, the cases before the limit receive the value 1 in the dummy variable the other values receive 0.
Your explanation is rather vague. And the critical value you give in the printscreen should be 2.009 in stead of 20.09?
But I think you mean the following.
When using syntax, use:
compute newdummyvariable eq (ABr gt 2.009477106).
To check if it's okay:
fre newdummyvariable.
UPDATE:
In order to compute a dummy based on the cumulative sum, the answer is as follows:
If your critical value is predetermined, the fastest way is to sort in decending order, and to use the command create with csum() to compute an extra variable which I called ABr_cumul. This one, you use to compute the newdummyvariable. As follows:
sort cases by ABr (d).
create ABr_cumul = csum(VAR00001).
compute newdummyvariable = (ABr_cumul le 20.094771061766488).
fre newdummyvariable.
the dummy comes from the sum of all cases, after decreasing order raqueados when cases of a variable representing 50% of the variable t0tal, these cases receive 1 and the other 0 ...

Can't modify loop-variable in lua [duplicate]

This question already has answers here:
Lua for loop reduce i? Weird behavior [duplicate]
(3 answers)
Closed 7 years ago.
im trying this in lua:
for i = 1, 10,1 do
print(i)
i = i+2
end
I would expect the following output:
1,4,7,10
However, it seems like i is getting not affected, so it gives me:
1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10
Can someone tell my a bit about the background concept and what is the right way to modify the counter variable?
As Colonel Thirty Two said, there is no way to modify a loop variable in Lua. Or rather more to the point, the loop counter in Lua is hidden from you. The variable i in your case is merely a copy of the counter's current value. So changing it does nothing; it will be overwritten by the actual hidden counter every time the loop cycles.
When you write a for loop in Lua, it always means exactly what it says. This is good, since it makes it abundantly clear when you're doing looping over a fixed sequence (whether a count or a set of data) and when you're doing something more complicated.
for is for fixed loops; if you want dynamic looping, you must use a while loop. That way, the reader of the code is aware that looping is not fixed; that it's under your control.
When using a Numeric for loop, you can change the increment by the third value, in your example you set it to 1.
To see what I mean:
for i = 1,10,3 do
print(i)
end
However this isn't always a practical solution, because often times you'll only want to modify the loop variable under specific conditions. When you wish to do this, you can use a while loop (or if you want your code to run at least once, a repeat loop):
local i = 1
while i < 10 do
print(i)
i = i + 1
end
Using a while loop you have full control over the condition, and any variables (be they global or upvalues).
All answers / comments so far only suggested while loops; here's two more ways of working around this problem:
If you always have the same step size, which just isn't 1, you can explicitly give the step size as in for i =start,end,stepdo … end, e.g. for i = 1, 10, 3 do … or for i = 10, 1, -1 do …. If you need varying step sizes, that won't work.
A "problem" with while-loops is that you always have to manually increment your counter and forgetting this in a sub-branch easily leads to infinite loops. I've seen the following pattern a few times:
local diff = 0
for i = 1, n do
i = i+diff
if i > n then break end
-- code here
-- and to change i for the next round, do something like
if some_condition then
diff = diff + 1 -- skip 1 forward
end
end
This way, you cannot forget incrementing i, and you still have the adjusted i available in your code. The deltas are also kept in a separate variable, so scanning this for bugs is relatively easy. (i autoincrements so must work, any assignment to i below the loop body's first line is an error, check whether you are/n't assigning diff, check branches, …)

string comparison against factors in Stata

Suppose I have a factor variable with labels "a" "b" and "c" and want to see which observations have a label of "b". Stata refuses to parse
gen isb = myfactor == "b"
Sure, there is literally a "type mismatch", since my factor is encoded as an integer and so cannot be compared to the string "b". However, it wouldn't kill Stata to (i) perform the obvious parse or (ii) provide a translator function so I can write the comparison as label(myfactor) == "b". Using decode to (re)create a string variable defeats the purpose of encoding, which is to save space and make computations more efficient, right?
I hadn't really expected the comparison above to work, but I at least figured there would be a one- or two-line approach. Here is what I have found so far. There is a nice macro ("extended") function that maps the other way (from an integer to a label, seen below as local labi: label ...). Here's the solution using it:
// sample data
clear
input str5 mystr int mynum
a 5
b 5
b 6
c 4
end
encode mystr, gen(myfactor)
// first, how many groups are there?
by myfactor, sort: gen ng = _n == 1
replace ng = sum(ng)
scalar ng = ng[_N]
drop ng
// now, which code corresponds to "b"?
forvalues i = 1/`=ng'{
local labi: label myfactor `i'
if "b" == "`labi'" {
scalar bcode = `i'
break
}
}
di bcode
The second step is what irks me, but I'm sure there's a also faster, more idiomatic way of performing the first step. Can I grab the length of the label vector, for example?
An example:
clear all
set more off
sysuse auto
gen isdom = 1 if foreign == "Domestic":`:value label foreign'
list foreign isdom in 1/60
This creates a variable called isdom and it will equal 1 if foreigns's value label is equal to "Domestic". It uses an extended macro function.
From [U] 18.3.8 Macro expressions:
Also, typing
command that makes reference to `:extended macro function'
is equivalent to
local macroname : extended macro function
command that makes reference to `macroname'
This explains one of the two : in the offered syntax. The other can be explained by
... to specify value labels directly in an expression, rather than through
the underlying numeric value ... You specify the label in double quotes
(""), followed by a colon (:), followed by the name of the value
label.
The quote is from Stata tip 14: Using value labels in expressions, by Kenneth Higbee, The Stata Journal (2004). Freely available at http://www.stata-journal.com/sjpdf.html?articlenum=dm0009
Edit
On computing the number of distinct observations, another way is:
by myfactor, sort: gen ng = _n == 1
count if ng
scalar sc_ng = r(N)
display sc_ng
But yours is fine. In fact, it is documented here: http://www.stata.com/support/faqs/data-management/number-of-distinct-observations/, along with more methods and comments.

Constrained Sequence to Index Mapping

I'm puzzling over how to map a set of sequences to consecutive integers.
All the sequences follow this rule:
A_0 = 1
A_n >= 1
A_n <= max(A_0 .. A_n-1) + 1
I'm looking for a solution that will be able to, given such a sequence, compute a integer for doing a lookup into a table and given an index into the table, generate the sequence.
Example: for length 3, there are 5 the valid sequences. A fast function for doing the following map (preferably in both direction) would be a good solution
1,1,1 0
1,1,2 1
1,2,1 2
1,2,2 3
1,2,3 4
The point of the exercise is to get a packed table with a 1-1 mapping between valid sequences and cells.
The size of the set in bounded only by the number of unique sequences possible.
I don't know now what the length of the sequence will be but it will be a small, <12, constant known in advance.
I'll get to this sooner or later, but though I'd throw it out for the community to have "fun" with in the meantime.
these are different valid sequences
1,1,2,3,2,1,4
1,1,2,3,1,2,4
1,2,3,4,5,6,7
1,1,1,1,2,3,2
these are not
1,2,2,4
2,
1,1,2,3,5
Related to this
There is a natural sequence indexing, but no so easy to calculate.
Let look for A_n for n>0, since A_0 = 1.
Indexing is done in 2 steps.
Part 1:
Group sequences by places where A_n = max(A_0 .. A_n-1) + 1. Call these places steps.
On steps are consecutive numbers (2,3,4,5,...).
On non-step places we can put numbers from 1 to number of steps with index less than k.
Each group can be represent as binary string where 1 is step and 0 non-step. E.g. 001001010 means group with 112aa3b4c, a<=2, b<=3, c<=4. Because, groups are indexed with binary number there is natural indexing of groups. From 0 to 2^length - 1. Lets call value of group binary representation group order.
Part 2:
Index sequences inside a group. Since groups define step positions, only numbers on non-step positions are variable, and they are variable in defined ranges. With that it is easy to index sequence of given group inside that group, with lexicographical order of variable places.
It is easy to calculate number of sequences in one group. It is number of form 1^i_1 * 2^i_2 * 3^i_3 * ....
Combining:
This gives a 2 part key: <Steps, Group> this then needs to be mapped to the integers. To do that we have to find how many sequences are in groups that have order less than some value. For that, lets first find how many sequences are in groups of given length. That can be computed passing through all groups and summing number of sequences or similar with recurrence. Let T(l, n) be number of sequences of length l (A_0 is omitted ) where maximal value of first element can be n+1. Than holds:
T(l,n) = n*T(l-1,n) + T(l-1,n+1)
T(1,n) = n
Because l + n <= sequence length + 1 there are ~sequence_length^2/2 T(l,n) values, which can be easily calculated.
Next is to calculate number of sequences in groups of order less or equal than given value. That can be done with summing of T(l,n) values. E.g. number of sequences in groups with order <= 1001010 binary, is equal to
T(7,1) + # for 1000000
2^2 * T(4,2) + # for 001000
2^2 * 3 * T(2,3) # for 010
Optimizations:
This will give a mapping but the direct implementation for combining the key parts is >O(1) at best. On the other hand, the Steps portion of the key is small and by computing the range of Groups for each Steps value, a lookup table can reduce this to O(1).
I'm not 100% sure about upper formula, but it should be something like it.
With these remarks and recurrence it is possible to make functions sequence -> index and index -> sequence. But not so trivial :-)
I think hash with out sorting should be the thing.
As A0 always start with 0, may be I think we can think of the sequence as an number with base 12 and use its base 10 as the key for look up. ( Still not sure about this).
This is a python function which can do the job for you assuming you got these values stored in a file and you pass the lines to the function
def valid_lines(lines):
for line in lines:
line = line.split(",")
if line[0] == 1 and line[-1] and line[-1] <= max(line)+1:
yield line
lines = (line for line in open('/tmp/numbers.txt'))
for valid_line in valid_lines(lines):
print valid_line
Given the sequence, I would sort it, then use the hash of the sorted sequence as the index of the table.

Resources