Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#1
![]()
Posted to microsoft.public.excel.worksheet.functions
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I have a survival dataset (see below). I want to fit to Weibull function
S(t)=EXP(-alpha*Time^gamma). If I use Excel Solver, alpha=0.00367 and gamma=2.32. If I use a method tranforming probability to Ln(Ln(1/S(t)) which will be a linear function of Ln (t). But I got a different alpha and gamma. When I compared two alphas adn gammas, the Solver results had a better goodness of fit. What is the problem? THanks Month Probability of survival 0 1 1 1 2 0.92 3 0.90 4 0.88 5 0.83 6 0.76 7 0.74 8 0.69 9 0.57 10 0.48 11 0.39 12 0.27 13 0.27 14 0.13 |
#3
![]()
Posted to microsoft.public.excel.worksheet.functions
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Hi Mike, thanks for the reply. So if I want to find a function with best fit,
adding a trendline is not an proper method. I got the weibull function estimates from someone else and then try to replicate the results in Excel. When I used Solver, most of the time I can get the parameter estimates with the best fit. I was told there is no feasible solution. How to properly use Solver? Thanks Barbo "Mike Middleton" wrote: Barbo - What is the problem? < There is no problem. You should expect a difference. Your Solver method (which I prefer) minimizes sum of squared deviations between actual S and fitted S. The other method uses transformed values, so it does not yield a better fit. (Excel's trendline features use transformations to fit the logarithmic, power, and exponential functions. The approach appears to be a computational convenience. Better fits are obtained using Solver.) - Mike http://www.MikeMiddleton.com "Barbo" wrote in message ... I have a survival dataset (see below). I want to fit to Weibull function S(t)=EXP(-alpha*Time^gamma). If I use Excel Solver, alpha=0.00367 and gamma=2.32. If I use a method tranforming probability to Ln(Ln(1/S(t)) which will be a linear function of Ln (t). But I got a different alpha and gamma. When I compared two alphas adn gammas, the Solver results had a better goodness of fit. What is the problem? THanks Month Probability of survival 0 1 1 1 2 0.92 3 0.90 4 0.88 5 0.83 6 0.76 7 0.74 8 0.69 9 0.57 10 0.48 11 0.39 12 0.27 13 0.27 14 0.13 . |
#4
![]()
Posted to microsoft.public.excel.worksheet.functions
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Barbo -
How to properly use Solver? < Solver's success with nonlinear functions may depend on the initial values for the changing cells. For simple functions, like the Weibull, you may have some idea of reasonable initial values. - Mike http://www.MikeMiddleton.com "Barbo" wrote in message ... Hi Mike, thanks for the reply. So if I want to find a function with best fit, adding a trendline is not an proper method. I got the weibull function estimates from someone else and then try to replicate the results in Excel. When I used Solver, most of the time I can get the parameter estimates with the best fit. I was told there is no feasible solution. How to properly use Solver? Thanks Barbo "Mike Middleton" wrote: Barbo - What is the problem? < There is no problem. You should expect a difference. Your Solver method (which I prefer) minimizes sum of squared deviations between actual S and fitted S. The other method uses transformed values, so it does not yield a better fit. (Excel's trendline features use transformations to fit the logarithmic, power, and exponential functions. The approach appears to be a computational convenience. Better fits are obtained using Solver.) - Mike http://www.MikeMiddleton.com "Barbo" wrote in message ... I have a survival dataset (see below). I want to fit to Weibull function S(t)=EXP(-alpha*Time^gamma). If I use Excel Solver, alpha=0.00367 and gamma=2.32. If I use a method tranforming probability to Ln(Ln(1/S(t)) which will be a linear function of Ln (t). But I got a different alpha and gamma. When I compared two alphas adn gammas, the Solver results had a better goodness of fit. What is the problem? THanks Month Probability of survival 0 1 1 1 2 0.92 3 0.90 4 0.88 5 0.83 6 0.76 7 0.74 8 0.69 9 0.57 10 0.48 11 0.39 12 0.27 13 0.27 14 0.13 . |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Excel Data Validation/Lookup function does function correcty | Excel Worksheet Functions | |||
weibull distribution function - graph | New Users to Excel | |||
WEIBULL formula to get probability rate | Excel Worksheet Functions | |||
Little help with weibull function needed | Excel Worksheet Functions | |||
Weibull paper in Excel - how? | Charts and Charting in Excel |