<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic I think I see a bug in saving CI border formula in Bivariate: 90% CI saved regardless of alpha chosen. 17.0.0 in Discussions</title>
    <link>https://community.jmp.com/t5/Discussions/I-think-I-see-a-bug-in-saving-CI-border-formula-in-Bivariate-90/m-p/664150#M85251</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;I was trying to save datapoints that lay above 99.9% CI from Bivariate linear regression results. Selected alpha 0.001 and saved Indiv CIs formula. JM surely enough saves 2 columns named Lower.. and&amp;nbsp; Upper 99.9% Indiv[my Y variable name]. However, when selecting points in which&amp;nbsp;my Y variable &amp;gt; Upper I see that these limits correspond to much less strict CI, apparently 90%.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Removing Fit and redoing it does not help, obviously&lt;/P&gt;&lt;PRE&gt;&lt;CODE class=" language-jsl"&gt;Bivariate(
	Y( :"Dtranscr=sqrt(Sum(dZ2))"n ),
	X( :Meanpident ),
	Fit Line(
		{Confid Curves Indiv( 1 ), Line Color( "Red" )},
		{Set α Level( 0.001 )}
	),
	SendToReport(
		Dispatch(
			{},
			"Bivar Plot",
			FrameBox,
			{Frame Size( 617, 465 ), Grid Line Order( 3 ), Reference Line Order( 4 )
			}
		)
	)
);&lt;/CODE&gt;&lt;/PRE&gt;&lt;P&gt;, because alpha is set after the fitting is done.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;This looks like a bug worth fixing, unless I am overlooking something.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Mon, 31 Jul 2023 17:24:59 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>l_yampolsky</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2023-07-31T17:24:59Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>I think I see a bug in saving CI border formula in Bivariate: 90% CI saved regardless of alpha chosen. 17.0.0</title>
      <link>https://community.jmp.com/t5/Discussions/I-think-I-see-a-bug-in-saving-CI-border-formula-in-Bivariate-90/m-p/664150#M85251</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;I was trying to save datapoints that lay above 99.9% CI from Bivariate linear regression results. Selected alpha 0.001 and saved Indiv CIs formula. JM surely enough saves 2 columns named Lower.. and&amp;nbsp; Upper 99.9% Indiv[my Y variable name]. However, when selecting points in which&amp;nbsp;my Y variable &amp;gt; Upper I see that these limits correspond to much less strict CI, apparently 90%.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Removing Fit and redoing it does not help, obviously&lt;/P&gt;&lt;PRE&gt;&lt;CODE class=" language-jsl"&gt;Bivariate(
	Y( :"Dtranscr=sqrt(Sum(dZ2))"n ),
	X( :Meanpident ),
	Fit Line(
		{Confid Curves Indiv( 1 ), Line Color( "Red" )},
		{Set α Level( 0.001 )}
	),
	SendToReport(
		Dispatch(
			{},
			"Bivar Plot",
			FrameBox,
			{Frame Size( 617, 465 ), Grid Line Order( 3 ), Reference Line Order( 4 )
			}
		)
	)
);&lt;/CODE&gt;&lt;/PRE&gt;&lt;P&gt;, because alpha is set after the fitting is done.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;This looks like a bug worth fixing, unless I am overlooking something.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 31 Jul 2023 17:24:59 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.jmp.com/t5/Discussions/I-think-I-see-a-bug-in-saving-CI-border-formula-in-Bivariate-90/m-p/664150#M85251</guid>
      <dc:creator>l_yampolsky</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2023-07-31T17:24:59Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: I think I see a bug in saving CI border formula in Bivariate: 90% CI saved regardless of alpha chosen. 17.0.0</title>
      <link>https://community.jmp.com/t5/Discussions/I-think-I-see-a-bug-in-saving-CI-border-formula-in-Bivariate-90/m-p/664202#M85255</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi&amp;nbsp;&lt;a href="https://community.jmp.com/t5/user/viewprofilepage/user-id/10611"&gt;@l_yampolsky&lt;/a&gt;&amp;nbsp;,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp; Not sure why you're having an issue. I tried it with the Big Class.jmp file, and it works just fine.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp; I first did a fit y by x of height and weight, fit a line to it, then changed alpha, then saved the confidence indiv limit formula, and did that for both alpha = 0.001 and 0.01, and it worked just fine. The column formulas are different, and the smaller alpha has a wider CI, as expected.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;span class="lia-inline-image-display-wrapper lia-image-align-inline" image-alt="SDF1_0-1690833031701.png" style="width: 400px;"&gt;&lt;img src="https://community.jmp.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/55482i4062D4EC3FC4329F/image-size/medium?v=v2&amp;amp;px=400" role="button" title="SDF1_0-1690833031701.png" alt="SDF1_0-1690833031701.png" /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;span class="lia-inline-image-display-wrapper lia-image-align-inline" image-alt="SDF1_1-1690833131381.png" style="width: 400px;"&gt;&lt;img src="https://community.jmp.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/55483i0A69835854E7E393/image-size/medium?v=v2&amp;amp;px=400" role="button" title="SDF1_1-1690833131381.png" alt="SDF1_1-1690833131381.png" /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp; Are you sure you did the order of operations correctly so that when you saved the Confidence Indiv Limit Formula it saved the correct formula?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp; Not sure what's going wrong, but give it a try with the Big Class.jmp file first and make sure that what you're expecting happens (no bug) or something different (bug) happens.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Hope this helps!,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;DS&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 02 Aug 2023 14:48:51 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.jmp.com/t5/Discussions/I-think-I-see-a-bug-in-saving-CI-border-formula-in-Bivariate-90/m-p/664202#M85255</guid>
      <dc:creator>SDF1</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2023-08-02T14:48:51Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

