Re: [Gretl-devel] [Gretl-users] multivariate lrvar?

Am 16.04.2018 um 23:11 schrieb Allin Cottrell: > On Mon, 16 Apr 2018, Sven Schreiber wrote: >> Yes, why not. >> And your take on the default? Action or no action? I tend to think >> that for generic (multiple) variables there's no reason to expect >> they're demeaned already (thus default "yes do demean them first"), >> but I'm not sure. > > I'd be OK with making "true" (non-zero) the default for the do-demeaning > argument to lrcovar() -- assuming we make the flip that I claimed as > more intuitive above, which is not yet the case in git! > > So, just to be explicit, the idea would then be: > > V = lrcovar(X)    # does de-meaning > V = lrcovar(X, 1) # does de-meaning (more explicitly) > V = lrcovar(X, 0) # cancels de-meaning > > Is this preferable to what's in place right now? Which is: I think I prefer this way (above; although everything is arbitrary of course). About the meanings of 0 and 1, one reason is your "action" indicator semantics, and the other one is that the (X, 0) combination could be intuitively read out as "these Xes already have mean 0 [thus do not demean again]". About the preferred default (of 1/action) I gave my argument above. If there's consensus, "somebody" please apply the change to git.