JMP Wish List

What inspired this wish list request?  I am trying to fit a pharmaceutical stability analysis with Fit Mixed (as discussed, e.g., in Statistics for Biotechnology Process Development). However, I cannot replicate the corresponding SAS analysis because the approved methodology uses the SAS default for DDFM (CONTAIN). The current JMP hardcoded variation of Kenward Roger (which appears to be accurate and similar to analogous PROC MIXED output) gives me volatile DF estimates that render the current implementation in JMP unusable. I understand the benefits of KR, but this is a set procedure (sort of like the corresponding fixed effect stability analysis in the Degradation platform) that I need to match.     What is the improvement you would like to see?  Add at least one of the other DDFM options similar to PROC MIXED for Fit Mixed and/or Fit Least Squares.     Why is this idea important?  This is a common application for pharmaceutical customers and they may need to use SAS instead.     ... View more

I am building a dashboard and recording the steps with the workflow builder. I would love to have the possibility to save the script for creating the dashboard to the workflow. Since the creation of a Dashboard is not captured in the Enhanced Log, I suspect this is why there is no option in the Dashboard window to export a dashboard as a Workflow?          ... View more

What inspired this wish list request?  When building complex models based on large number of collinear/correlated variables, there are several possibilities available. One of them is transforming the variables into principal components, and then create a model based on these principal components to avoid collinearity issues, reduce dimensionality and keep a large part of the initial information. The problem that could happen in predictive modeling is data leakage : information from the validation set and/or test set is used in the pre-processing and/or model building. This can happen in PCA platform if validation/test rows are not hidden and excluded : if the PCA is done on the whole dataset and after models are built on the training principal components data, the model still contains a part of the information from the validation and test sets. Model evaluation can become biased as the performances would be assessed too "optimistically".   What is the improvement you would like to see?  As for other platforms (see Fit Model below), I would like a validation role when launching the PCA platform dialog, so that the PCA is created with the training rows, and applied on validation and test rows :      Why is this idea important?  The validation role for PCA would enable user to be more aware of this data leakage situation when they are building predictive models. It's also part of the best practices to split the dataset first into train/valid/test sets before doing any transformation/model, so adding this validation role would enforce a reliable best practice for users. Finally, it would be also easier to use PCA in a more reliable way as a pre-processing step for predictive models with this feature, instead of manually or scripting excluding rows.   ... View more

Hi!  I think it would be great to have the possibility to visualize a surface profiler plot within the Easy DoE platform. Since it is possible to design RSM, it would make sense to also be able to see these results in that specific profiler.  ... View more

I perform multivariate linear regressions using the stepwise statistical analysis method, and when I need to remove variables with a high VIF in the coefficient estimation section, I have to search for them among the summary of effects section to select and remove them. The improvement I would like to see is the ability to directly select variables in the coefficient estimation section, which would automatically select the corresponding variable in the summary of effects section for removal. This would save a lot of time when conducting this type of test with a large number of variables.   ... View more

What inspired this wish list request?      What is the improvement you would like to see? Add a quick blurb about the DOE method, JMP version, etc. to easy DOE reports     Why is this idea important?      ... View more

The JMP Genomics has a few normalization methods for RNAseq data, including KDMM, RPM scaling, TMM, TPM and upper quartile scaling. The JMP Pro 17 is missing such important tools. The purpose of normalization methods for RNAseq or other large scale data, such as metabolomics, is to reduce systematic experimental bias and technical variation. Manuscript can be rejected by journal because the data was not normalized. The most commonly used normalization methods for RNAseq are “Reads Per Kilobase of transcripts per Million mapped reads” (RPKM) (Mortazavi et al., 2008; doi: 10.1038/nmeth.1226) and Trimmed Mean of M-values (TMM) (Robinson and Oshlack; doi: 10.1186/gb-2010-11-3-r25). My wish is to include normalization methods into JMP Pro     ... View more

What inspired this wish list request?  Found some inaccuracies with the case of non-normal part variation and test/re-test variation on probabilities of misclassification.   What is the improvement you would like to see?  Add support for Gauge study analysis (including the misclassification probability calculation piece) with a nonparametric or semi-parametric modeling approach.  This may or may not include support for bootstrapping on the Misclassification Probabilities report outline.   Why is this idea important?  This may increase various accuracies of estimates when part-to-part and measurement variation are severely not-normal (but still considered stable) when studied in a Gauge R&R.   ... View more

What inspired this wish list request? When finding the best fitting theoretical distribution using Analyze>Distribution>Continuous Fit>Fit All, the AICc weight is displayed.  When finding if for life data through Analyze>Life Distribution>Fit All Nonnegative, there is no option to display the weight.     What is the improvement you would like to see? Make the weight an option for all paths of fitting distributions.   Why is this idea important? Consistency of outputs and interpretation of results.   ... View more

What inspired this wish list request?    DoE's with a large number of factors are laborious to load up in JMP right now since you have to type them out one by one - there is no easy (non-scripting) way to load them (the factors and their ranges) in otherwise   What is the improvement you would like to see?    I would like to see functionality to be able to paste a list or table of factors and their min/max values into JMP.    Why is this idea important?    JMP has powerful model-fitting functionality but not having this functionality makes me more likely to choose alternative software which makes it easier and faster for the user to use.    ... View more

What inspired this wish list request?      What is the improvement you would like to see?      Why is this idea important?      ... View more

Hi JMP Team and Community,   Here are my proposals, mainly focussed for the "Model Screening" platform, but it perhaps could be extended to other platforms if it is relevant. I hope these ideas may not sound too crazy or "off".   What inspired this wish list request? When comparing different methods through the "Model Screening" platform, the metrics used to compare the methods are R², and Mean/Std RASE. Even if it might already guide and highlight some choices regarding the "best methods", it may be sometimes difficult to compare and make a choice when results are similar across several methods. There seems to be no indication of the "complexity" of the methods used in this platform (perhaps through an information criterion like AICc/BIC, or a simple computation time metric ("elapsed time" available in the red triangle but not by default)), which might be an interesting and important information if the model is going to be used in production, where model's latency could be an important parameter.  Finally, as sustainability is one of the most important priority today, it might be interesting to compare models not only on their "statistical" performances, but also to take into consideration computation time/energy consumption through relevant metrics.    What are the improvements you would like to see?   Would it be possible to add graphs regarding the evolution of R² for different methods, and perhaps also a graph with Mean RASE (and Std RASE as intervals in graph) to better assess the differences between methods ? Would it be possible to add other evaluation metrics, particularly a metric focussed on model complexity (AICc/BIC and/or computation time by default) ? This can help sort out similar models performances by promoting the most simple ones (as it should be done, always favor parcimonious/simple models if/when possible). Since the computation time is easily recorded ("elapsed time" is available in the options of the red triangle), it would be great to highlight this information in the platform results as an indication for "model's sustainability/complexity". If possible, using this information and the informations of the equipment/device/computer used by JMP may enable to create indicators, such as the "Code Carbon" open-source initiative, providing CO2 emissions based on computation time, GPU/CPU, energy consumption : Motivation — CodeCarbon 2.0.0 documentation (mlco2.github.io)   Why is this idea important?  As JMP is famous for its interactivity accross graphics and its ease of use/access through helpful graphs that help non-statisticians get the relevant informations, it would be interesting to consider adding some visualizations in the "Model Screening" platform, since the available graphs are "only" "Actual by Predicted" and "Profiler". There may be a lack of visualization for decision-making process about the choice of the method. As JMP is oriented towards engineers and scientists, having a clear idea about the complexity of a model might help to choose the best compromise between precision, explainability and speed. Adding a complexity metric may also help JMP users consider it not only for exploration/discovery purposes, but also as a prototyping tool for production mode, where models latency is an important factor. JMP already has a lot of people in its community that are dedicated or passionate about environment. The "Data for Green" also highlights the engagement of JMP towards sustainability and environment. Being able to provide an informations in this platform that may highlight the impact and help differentiate methods based on a relevant metric looks like a huge opportunity and a key differentiator compared to other softwares, as well as being able to raise awareness.   Looking forward to know your feedback, and if people are interested to comment, feel free :) Happy new year and all the best,      ... View more

When creating a DoE setup, I often color the cells based on high/low/center level settings to highlight the system of the overall design. I have used the 'Value Color' column property to do so. @jthi automated the process of coloring the selected columns by the script given in this community post: https://community.jmp.com/t5/Discussions/Script-to-color-cells-in-a-DoE-setup/m-p/585788#M79141 Could a script like this be a default one with all DoE created in JMP? I believe that many DoE users would benefit from having this at hand when evaluating and comparing designs. ... View more

Hello,   I'm requesting an enhancement to provide the prediction expression for the output of Fit Parametric Survival, similar to what's available for Fit Model and Bivariate. This expression should also be portable to a (combined) data table. Regards Mehul Shroff ... View more

Hello,   I would like to request that the Find and Replace functionality be enhanced to allow users to make the changes across multiple open data tables or scripts. These can be stand-alone files or files within a project.   Regards Mehul Shroff ... View more

In previous versions of JMP, the unequal variances test option was enabled when using ANOVA with a block effect. This has been removed for JMP 16. Can it please be re-added? ... View more

Please add the function of [Save Script] > [To Data Table...] to Ishikawa Diagram.   Seeing the log, the script of Ishikawa Diagram includes data like this.   Diagram( hierarchy( Hier Box( Text Edit Box( "..." ),   Please code column names not their values like this.   Diagram( Child( :child ), Parent( :parent ), Label(:name), By(:grp) );   ... View more

Hello,   Having the possibility to choose range shown on Y axis in graph builder would be great! when you have data on a wide range it is not nice to have them flattened because you have to show all data on Y.   Thanks in advance,   Marie ... View more

Add some way to easily see the name of toolbars. Currently I think I have enable/disable toolbars until I notice which one has disappeared. It would be helpful to have toolbar name visible for example by hovering over the re-order part of toolbar similarly as tool tips are displayed for toolbar items. Or maybe highlighting the toolbar name if right-click is pressed on top of it is enough   This isn't yet a real issue, but if I ever start adding many toolbars to JMP, I could see not easily seeing the toolbar name as a fairly annoying thing.   ... View more