These labs test and build on the material presented in the SWIRL lessons.
Scroll down or click here to to check how to submit them.
Lab 1 and 2: 2018-10-26 23:58
Lab 3 and recap: 2018-11-02 23:58
Read in the housing value data set for questions 1-3.
a. Which variables appear correlated with housing value?
b. Find the correlation coefficients between housing value and those variables identified in a.
a. Plot this relationship, and be sure to add your regression line to the plot.
b. How well does your model fit? Plot the residuals against the fitted values, and identify any possible issues if they exist.
c. Check the normality of your residuals, another key assumption.
a. Are there any apparent relationships with housing values that aren’t linear?
b. Identify one, and do the following:
i. Try to linearize the relationship by applying a transformation to the predictor. Common transformations include log, square root, and square. Make two plots, one of housing value against the untransformed predictor, and the other against the transformed predictor.
ii. Make two models, where you predictor is either transformed vs untransformed.
iii. Check the model summaries. Which has a better R-squared value (a measure of model fit)?
pirate <- data.frame(Temp = c(14.2, 14.4, 14.55, 14.8, 15.25, 15.5, 15.85), Npirates = c(35000, 45000, 20000, 15000, 5000, 400, 17), Year = c(1820, 1860, 1880, 1920, 1940, 1980, 2000))
a. Plot the relationship between temperature and number of pirates.
b. Test this relationship statistically. Why did you choose this test?
a. Plot circumference as a function of age.
b. Test for an effect of age on circumference.
c. Is this relationship the same for all Trees? Run a model to test this.
d. Add fitted lines for each Tree to the figure.
a. Perform 3 separate multiple regressions with housing value as your response, combining predictors in any way you see fit. You can include as many predictors as you think are important for each model, with a minimum of 2, including any interactions you think might exist.
b. Ensure your predictors aren’t collinear in each model.
c. Which of your models best fits the data? Test this statistically.
Read in the data
dat <- read.table(file = "http://www.intro2r.info/data/flowering.txt", header = TRUE, sep = '\t')
This dataset contains information on flowering of 1500 Myrsticaceae trees in 2002 in the Yasuni Forest Dynamics Plot, a tropical lowland rain forest in Ecuador.
There are data on seven species (
$SpCode), their size (
$dbh), their sex (
$Sex: 0, F, M), if they flowered that year (
$Flowers: 1/0), and an index of light availability in the canopy (
$CII:, 0-5, with 0 being no light and 5 being full overhead and side light).
a. Examine the structure of the data.
b. Look at the first 7 rows.
c. Is the ratio of flowering to non-flowering trees different from 1:1 (over all species)?
d. Is the ratio of M to F trees different from 1:1 (over all species)?
e. Size is likely a key factor affecting the chance of flowering in one year. Model the probability of flowering as a function of size for the species iryapa.
f. Plot the data and the predicted curve of this relationship.
g. Do male and female trees of this species have a different probability of flowering as a function of size? h. Plot these flowering curves for male and female iryapa trees.
The horsekick data give the number of soldiers in the Prussian cavalry killed by horse kicks, by corp membership and by year. The years are from 1875 to 1894, and there are 14 different cavalry corps: the first column corresponds to the guard corp and the other columns to corps 1 through 11, 14, and 15.
The data are from Distributome project and are derived from the book by Andrews and Herzberg. The original source of the data is the classic book by von Bortkiewicz (references are given below). The data are famous because they seem to fit the Poisson model reasonably well.
You will likely need to reformat the data.
a. Test whether there were differences in the number of deaths between companies.
b. Was any year particularly bad for deaths?
For the unit recap, we will use the “state.x77” dataset that comes preloaded in R.
Population Income Illiteracy Life Exp Murder HS Grad Frost Area Alabama 3615 3624 2.1 69.05 15.1 41.3 20 50708 Alaska 365 6315 1.5 69.31 11.3 66.7 152 566432 Arizona 2212 4530 1.8 70.55 7.8 58.1 15 113417 Arkansas 2110 3378 1.9 70.66 10.1 39.9 65 51945 California 21198 5114 1.1 71.71 10.3 62.6 20 156361 Colorado 2541 4884 0.7 72.06 6.8 63.9 166 103766
a. Check the structure of your data.
b. Convert it into a data frame.
c. Rename problematic variable names in your new data frame.
a. Explore the data to identify variables associated with life expectancy (identify at least 2)
b. Do a simple regression for each association identified. Which one fits best?
c. Plot each of these associations. Make sure to give your plots proper axis labels and a title. Add the fitted line to each plot, give it a color other than black, and double its line width.
d. Now do a multiple regression with all of your predictors. Are all the predictors you identified in 2a still important?
a. Maybe we have an expectation that there’s an important threshold at 50% high school graduation rate, and wish to model this. Convert the high school graduation variable into a binary dummy variable, where <50% is 0 and >50% is 1.
b. Perform a logistic regression, using any predictor you think might be important.
c. Plot this relationship, give your plot proper labels, and include the fitted logistic regression line (which you’ll have to predict)
a. Check the distribution of the population variable. Does it appear normal?
b. Check the distribution of the area variable. Does it appear normal?
c. Lets model population as a function of area
i. Transform your predictor (area) so that its normally distributed.
ii. Make the model. Is area a significant predictor of population?
iii. Model this relationship without specifying the family argument (i.e. make glm() think your response variable is normally distributed). Is area still important?
You will need to write R code to answer each of the questions.
Please format your answers as follows:
Copy and paste each question, commented out. This ensures that we know which answer corresponds to which question.
Write your R code answer below each question.
It should look something like this:
# LAB: Unit 1. Lab 1 # Your Name # Put your name here # 1. Add 7 and 3,456. 7 + 3456 # 2. Assign this value to an object x <- 7 + 3456
Log into Canvas.
Go to the Assignments page.
Under ‘Labs’, you should find the correct assignment.
Copy and paste your R code into the text box.
Click ‘Submit Assignment’.
You are permitted to submit your answers as many times as you like within each Unit.
Answers will be graded two or three times a week and re-opened if you submit early.
Each lab will close at its respective deadline (see Canvas).
Final grades for each lab will be computed and entered into the Canvas gradebook at the end of each Unit.