[R-SIG-Mac] [R] lme4 + R 2.11.0 + mac unavailable
Prof Brian Ripley
ripley at stats.ox.ac.uk
Sat Jul 31 13:24:39 CEST 2010
Let us be clear about what the issue seems to be. On i386 Mac (and
not on x86_64 Mac)
y <- (1:20)*pi; x <- (1:20)^2;group <- gl(2,10)
M2. <- lmer (y ~ 1 + x + (1 + x | group))
M2 <- lmer (y ~ x + ( x | group))
usually fails the first time but if you run it again it is usually
true, e.g. following on gave
> fixef(M2); fixef(M2.)
> M2. <- lmer (y ~ 1 + x + (1 + x | group))
I think 'later version of MacOS' is most likely someone not
understanding that x86_64 is the default for 'R' on Snow Leopard.
I've just checked this on Leopard and Snow Leopard. *But* it is not
repeatable, as sometimes I get TRUE the first run in a session -- and
once that happens it seems to keep happening until a reboot or I
I ran this under valgrind (on Leopard: there is now experimental
valgrind support for SL, but I've not installed it as yet) and saw no
reports of problems. However, on one of the times I tried it under
valgrind the result was further away:
For completeness, I also saw this using R's reference BLAS rather than
the (default on a CRAN build) Apple 'veclib' BLAS.
So the issue appears to be one of repeating the calculation and
getting different answers. That does look like a i386-Mac-specific
bug, but whether this is worth not distributing a binary for is
something for the lme4 authors to judge -- if not then a
platform-specific test opt-out seems the best way forward.
On Sat, 31 Jul 2010, John Maindonald wrote:
> Is optimisation of code a possibility, i.e., the same algebraic
> calculations done in a slightly different way depending on the state
> of various registers? E.g., (ab)c vs a(bc), but it would almost
> certainly be more subtle than that. That seems to me the sort of
> thing that is likely to be Mac-specific.
But the Mac shares a compiler with lots of other platforms, and the
gcc optimizer for i386 is pretty much shared across platforms (albeit
the Mac gcc is now rather old, but is of similar vintage to that used
on Windows for R 2.11.x). In any case, this is not (in my
experiments) an issue of numerical accuracy but of repeatability,
> John Maindonald email: john.maindonald at anu.edu.au
> phone : +61 2 (6125)3473 fax : +61 2(6125)5549
> Centre for Mathematics & Its Applications, Room 1194,
> John Dedman Mathematical Sciences Building (Building 27)
> Australian National University, Canberra ACT 0200.
> On 31/07/2010, at 5:09 AM, Martin Maechler wrote:
>> On Fri, Jul 30, 2010 at 17:29, Simon Urbanek
>> <simon.urbanek at r-project.org> wrote:
>>> On Jul 29, 2010, at 7:51 PM, Martin Maechler wrote:
>>>>>>>>> "KB" == Ken Beath <ken at kjbeath.com.au>
>>>>>>>>> on Wed, 28 Jul 2010 01:19:34 -0000 (GMT) writes:
>>>> KB> On Tue, July 27, 2010 11:07 pm, John Maindonald wrote:
>>>>>> Binaries for lme4 are not for the time being available either on
>>>>>> CRAN or on r-forge?
>>>> KB> There was a discussion about this on R-Sig-ME. It fails one of the checks
>>>> KB> on the machine used to build the mac packages. It may pass on machines
>>>> KB> with a later version of MacOS, but there didn't seem to be a consensus of
>>>> KB> whether failing the checks was a problem.
>>>> The underlyign issue seems to remain unresolved.
>>>> My best guess is still to low-level bugs somewhere in the libraries
>>>> However, to help users,
>>>> I'm willing to *not* run those tests when *running* on the Mac.
>>>> What does
>>>> return on the Mac, i.e., different versions of R running on the
>>>> From grepping around I'd expect it give "Darwin" in all cases.
>>>> Is that true?
>>> ... why don't you just compare the values with tolerance? That
>>> seems to make more sense that to disable the test altogether ...
>> Doug and I have explained in several occasions (but maybe not on R-SIG-Mac)
>> that this is *NOT* the point here.
>> It's not about "basically the same computations" it's about
>> identical computations, i.e. from identical numerical matrices and so
>> the use of identical() has been very much on purpose, and is different
>> from the well justified typical use of
>> all.equal() which we use in many other places.
>> And what people where reporting *is* a bit disturbing: The same
>> computations giving different answers for *exactly* the same
>> computation, e.g., depending if they had used
>> library(lme4) or require(lme4) to load the package ...
>> and the difference was not just the last significant bit, but changes
>> at about the 7-th significant digit.
>> R-SIG-Mac mailing list
>> R-SIG-Mac at stat.math.ethz.ch
> R-SIG-Mac mailing list
> R-SIG-Mac at stat.math.ethz.ch
Brian D. Ripley, ripley at stats.ox.ac.uk
Professor of Applied Statistics, http://www.stats.ox.ac.uk/~ripley/
University of Oxford, Tel: +44 1865 272861 (self)
1 South Parks Road, +44 1865 272866 (PA)
Oxford OX1 3TG, UK Fax: +44 1865 272595
More information about the R-SIG-Mac