This I totally agree with. My belief is that more education is needed to 
make open source software acceptable to regulators.

Note I have been using R (since version 0.6!) and usually mention in 
documents that I am using R version 1.5.1 or greater and SAS version 8.0 
or greater.






rossini@blindglobe.net (A.J. Rossini)
Sent by: r-help-bounces@stat.math.ethz.ch
04/17/2003 04:55 PM
Please respond to rossini

 
        To:     r-help@stat.math.ethz.ch
        cc: 
        Subject:        Re: [R] Validation of R



>> From: Paul, David A [mailto:paulda@BATTELLE.ORG]

>> For software, our internal standards basically say that
>>
>> (1) COTS (Com'l Off The Shelf software) developed by a
>> company having both a long history of selling high-quality
>> products and good QA doesn't need extensive from-scratch
>> validation, only validation of simpler routines like the
>> computation of means, variances, linear regression models,
>> &etc.  (After all, how would anyone really validate what,
>> say, PROC NLMIXED yields in a complex growth-curve application?)

Too bad that can't be edited just a bit:

(1) OTS (Off the Shelf software) developed by a group having both a
long history of creating high-quality products and good QA which
doesn't need extensive from-scratch validation, only validation of
simpler routines like the computation of means, variances, linear
regression models, etc.  (After all, how would anyone really validate
what, say, nlme(), yields in a complex growth-curve application, other
than one of the originators of one of the families of NLME
algorithms?)

best,
-tony

--
A.J. Rossini rossini@u.washington.edu http://software.biostat.washington.edu/
Biostatistics, U Washington and Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center
FHCRC:Tu: 206-667-7025 (fax=4812)|Voicemail is pretty sketchy/use Email
UW  : Th: 206-543-1044 (fax=3286)|Change last 4 digits of phone to FAX
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message and any attachments ... {{dropped}}

