[ADMB Users] a difference in estimates between versions?

[bigA]

Hi my std file is below.
I am running 64bit Debian and am using the intel compilers.
There might be some difference between the 32bit and 64 bit; however there
may be some
differences between compilers too. (Although there shouldn't be...)
I hope this helps.
Aaron

My admb version is:

ADMB Project
Version 10.1
Released January 17, 2011

index   name   value      std.dev
     1   r    5.0091e-01 1.3348e-02
     2   B1   8.9788e+04 2.8722e+03
     3   K    9.0963e+04 1.2664e+03
     4   lnq -2.1687e+00 1.1685e-01


On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 11:27 AM, Derek Seiple <dseiple84 at gmail.com> wrote:

> I ran Saang-Yoon's attached example on 32-bit ubuntu with version 9.1,
> 10.1, and the latest version with bug fixes. In ALL THREE I got the
> following .std file.
>
>  index   name   value      std dev
>      1   r    4.9790e-01 4.4611e-02
>     2   B1   8.8262e+04 9.0362e+03
>     3   K    9.1796e+04 4.5790e+03
>     4   lnq -2.1705e+00 1.4898e-01
>
>
> There was no difference in values amongst the versions. You will note
> though that these values are slightly different from the ones he
> supplied for ADMB IDE 450-1. This suggests to me that it is either a
> 32-bit-64-bit difference or a windows difference.
>
> Can anyone else run the attached model for 64-bit on linux and windows
> or 32-bit on windows for the two versions of ADMB and report the .std
> file for comparison?
>
> Derek
>
> On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 10:28 AM, dave fournier <davef at otter-rsch.com>
> wrote:
> > It is always interesting to see what kind of posts produce the most
> > response.
> > certainly none of mine. Anyway
> > there are a few standard things you can do to narrow this down.
> > First is to take the output from each model and put it into the other
> > version and see if the numbers
> > stay the same. That verifies that the code produces the same function
> value.
> > Also
> > you could reduce the convergence criterion as in -crit 1.e-6 to see if
> you
> > can get a little closer to the
> > actual minimum.
> >
> > Although it is not relevant to the discussion your approximation to the
> > differential equation
> > for the population dynamics is gross.  See the semi-implicit version in
> the
> > original
> > manual for an idea of how to do it right.
> > _______________________________________________
> > Users mailing list
> > Users at admb-project.org
> > http://lists.admb-project.org/mailman/listinfo/users
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> Users mailing list
> Users at admb-project.org
> http://lists.admb-project.org/mailman/listinfo/users
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.admb-project.org/pipermail/users/attachments/20111005/68951431/attachment.html>