Hi Derek,<div><div>1) Windows32bit with ADMB 9.0 get results</div><div><div> index name value std.dev </div></div></div><div><div> 1 r 5.0174e-001 7.1722e-002</div><div> 2 B1 8.9945e+004 1.3305e+004</div>
<div> 3 K 9.0813e+004 7.5575e+003</div><div> 4 lnq -2.1667e+000 1.8993e-001</div><div><br></div><div>2) Windows32bit with latest built (this Sept., after subversion 128) get results</div><div><div> index name value std.dev </div>
<div> 1 r 4.9970e-001 7.2940e-002</div><div> 2 B1 8.9504e+004 1.3599e+004</div><div>
3 K 9.1202e+004 7.9562e+003</div><div> 4 lnq -2.1695e+000 1.9095e-001</div><div><br></div><div><br></div>3) Ubuntu 64bit with latest built get hessian not positive definite warning with no std file.</div><div>
<br></div><div>3) Not run for windows 64 bit with latest built yet (on my home computer, if nobody run it, I will add that later).</div><div><br></div><div>weihai</div><div><br></div><div><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 2:27 PM, Derek Seiple <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:dseiple84@gmail.com" target="_blank">dseiple84@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">I ran Saang-Yoon's attached example on 32-bit ubuntu with version 9.1,<br>
10.1, and the latest version with bug fixes. In ALL THREE I got the<br>
following .std file.<br>
<div><br>
index name value std dev<br>
</div> 1 r 4.9790e-01 4.4611e-02<br>
2 B1 8.8262e+04 9.0362e+03<br>
3 K 9.1796e+04 4.5790e+03<br>
4 lnq -2.1705e+00 1.4898e-01<br>
<br>
<br>
There was no difference in values amongst the versions. You will note<br>
though that these values are slightly different from the ones he<br>
supplied for ADMB IDE 450-1. This suggests to me that it is either a<br>
32-bit-64-bit difference or a windows difference.<br>
<br>
Can anyone else run the attached model for 64-bit on linux and windows<br>
or 32-bit on windows for the two versions of ADMB and report the .std<br>
file for comparison?<br>
<font color="#888888"><br>
Derek<br>
</font><div><div></div><div><br>
On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 10:28 AM, dave fournier <<a href="mailto:davef@otter-rsch.com" target="_blank">davef@otter-rsch.com</a>> wrote:<br>
> It is always interesting to see what kind of posts produce the most<br>
> response.<br>
> certainly none of mine. Anyway<br>
> there are a few standard things you can do to narrow this down.<br>
> First is to take the output from each model and put it into the other<br>
> version and see if the numbers<br>
> stay the same. That verifies that the code produces the same function value.<br>
> Also<br>
> you could reduce the convergence criterion as in -crit 1.e-6 to see if you<br>
> can get a little closer to the<br>
> actual minimum.<br>
><br>
> Although it is not relevant to the discussion your approximation to the<br>
> differential equation<br>
> for the population dynamics is gross. See the semi-implicit version in the<br>
> original<br>
> manual for an idea of how to do it right.<br>
> _______________________________________________<br>
> Users mailing list<br>
> <a href="mailto:Users@admb-project.org" target="_blank">Users@admb-project.org</a><br>
> <a href="http://lists.admb-project.org/mailman/listinfo/users" target="_blank">http://lists.admb-project.org/mailman/listinfo/users</a><br>
><br>
</div></div><br>_______________________________________________<br>
Users mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Users@admb-project.org" target="_blank">Users@admb-project.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.admb-project.org/mailman/listinfo/users" target="_blank">http://lists.admb-project.org/mailman/listinfo/users</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br></div></div>