On Dec 4, 9:18 pm, djh <halitsk...@att.net> wrote: > The average slope ?Auq? of the regression c on (u,u^2)is the most > stable of our five new average slopes; in particular: > > i) for method N and dicodon set 1, we get a perfect S/C split of the > ?m?s? of the CI?s EVEN WHEN we plot the regressions of Auq on ALL > singleton lengths for S and for C of all methods/sets/subsets, AS > WELL AS when we do the same using the 12 length intervals instead of > all available singleton lengths. > > ii) for method N and dicodon set 2, we get an almost perfect S/C split > of the ?m?s? of the CI?s EVEN WHEN we plot the regressions of Auq on > ALL singleton lengths for S and for C of all methods/sets/subsets, AS > WELL AS when we do the same using the 12 length intervals instead of > all available singleton lengths. > > And this ?stability? of Aug, coupled with my abysmal ignorance and > naivete, leads me to ask the following question. > > When I user Ivor Welch?s module to compute the three new regessions > Ruq, Rub, and Ruqb per singleton length interval, his module allows me > to specify a constant which I now default to ?1?. > > So when I compute the regressions Rub and Ruq for a given singleton > length L, would any possible benefit accrue from using the value of > Auq for L (and, of course, the corresponding method, set, subset, and > fold)? > > Or is this an entirely illegitimate way to use Auq as a ?constant? > when computing Rub and Rubq? > > Thanks as always for considering this question.
What is the constant supposed to do or be? How does it fit into the regression equation?