[Gretl-users] Gretl: means by categorical variable

Hi Allin Thanks for checking. "as Sven pointed out, gretl actually stores a value of 1557590.272727." Would I be able to access the values for mean and for sum that gretl actually stores, so I could see all the digits? "I'd be very surprised if any population tallies were good to the nearest 10," Yes, even population is difficult to measure or estimate. But my paper actually has another purpose. I'm comparing the outcomes of various free to use, easy to use statistical programs to see if they give the same results. So in this case, I'd want to see if gretl gives the same values as does SAS, PSPP, JASP, Epi Info, and so on. Just to mention, all the programs I've checked do, in fact, give the same results. It looks like gretl probably will too, and the number you listed above, 1557590, is the same as all the other programs. So, if I could see all the digits, then I could check if gretl does too. Thanks again for the many responses. Gene On Sunday, May 26, 2024 at 06:27:56 PM EDT, Allin Cottrell <cottrell(a)wfu.edu&gt; wrote: On Sun, 26 May 2024, g s wrote: Yes, since that's true. But I'd suggest being a tad more precise: it prints the results to 5 significant digits. In the case of the mean population of Australia-Oceania, as Sven pointed out, gretl actually stores a value of 1557590.272727. By rounding to 1.5576 million we're in effect printing a value that's good to the nearest hundred people, not to the nearest 10. I'd be very surprised if any population tallies were good to the nearest 10, other than for very small communities. Still, I can see a case for considering alternative ways of printing some of the statistics for series composed of large integers. Allin Cottrell _______________________________________________ Gretl-users mailing list -- gretl-users(a)gretlml.univpm.it To unsubscribe send an email to gretl-users-leave(a)gretlml.univpm.it Website: https://gretlml.univpm.it/postorius/lists/gretl-users.gretlml.univpm.it/