Output suggestion for replications #3
Comments
|
Dear ThiagoOliveira, Thank you for all the suggestions, they are great we will include them in the package as suggested by you. Thank you very much for your time and consideration. |
40 tasks
|
Dear Profesor Thiago, I got your suggestion about the outputs for replications. I did it on some designs that involve those kinds of outputs. For example, we say a row-column design with 30 treatments, 5 rows, 3 reps across two locations. rowcold1 <- row_column(t = 30, nrows = 5, r = 3, l = 2,
plotNumber= c(101, 1001),
locationNames = c("FARGO", "NELSON"),
seed = 1201)
rowcold1$infoDesign
rowcold1$resolvableBlocks
head(rowcold1$fieldBook, 12)The output for this design looks like, > rowcold1 <- row_column(t = 30, nrows = 5, r = 3, l = 2,
+ plotNumber= c(101, 1001),
+ locationNames = c("FARGO", "NELSON"),
+ seed = 1201)
> rowcold1$infoDesign
$nRows
[1] 5
$nCols
[1] 6
$Reps
[1] 3
$NumberTreatments
[1] 30
$NumberLocations
[1] 2
$Locations
[1] "FARGO" "NELSON"
$seed
[1] 1201
> rowcold1$resolvableBlocks
$Loc_FARGO
$Loc_FARGO$rep1
[,1] [,2] [,3] [,4] [,5] [,6]
[1,] 11 18 12 6 15 3
[2,] 27 9 24 13 20 1
[3,] 2 4 14 28 21 23
[4,] 22 29 26 30 7 25
[5,] 16 5 8 19 10 17
$Loc_FARGO$rep2
[,1] [,2] [,3] [,4] [,5] [,6]
[1,] 14 18 2 12 8 28
[2,] 17 22 26 21 15 25
[3,] 20 3 10 1 6 24
[4,] 30 19 23 16 5 4
[5,] 29 7 9 13 11 27
$Loc_FARGO$rep3
[,1] [,2] [,3] [,4] [,5] [,6]
[1,] 18 13 9 1 30 12
[2,] 28 10 20 22 11 6
[3,] 21 5 19 14 25 29
[4,] 8 27 16 4 26 2
[5,] 23 17 24 15 7 3
$Loc_NELSON
$Loc_NELSON$rep1
[,1] [,2] [,3] [,4] [,5] [,6]
[1,] 25 20 22 21 24 5
[2,] 19 30 17 29 16 8
[3,] 12 15 27 23 3 10
[4,] 4 18 28 26 2 6
[5,] 13 1 11 7 9 14
$Loc_NELSON$rep2
[,1] [,2] [,3] [,4] [,5] [,6]
[1,] 13 16 14 8 2 10
[2,] 3 28 11 26 1 9
[3,] 17 6 24 4 12 27
[4,] 15 18 29 22 23 19
[5,] 21 25 30 20 5 7
$Loc_NELSON$rep3
[,1] [,2] [,3] [,4] [,5] [,6]
[1,] 17 4 27 10 18 14
[2,] 12 30 6 21 5 22
[3,] 16 23 2 20 7 3
[4,] 8 9 15 25 11 1
[5,] 29 28 26 24 13 19
> head(rowcold1$fieldBook, 12)
ID LOCATION PLOT REP ROW COLUMN ENTRY
1 1 FARGO 101 1 1 1 11
2 2 FARGO 102 1 1 2 18
3 3 FARGO 103 1 1 3 12
4 4 FARGO 104 1 1 4 6
5 5 FARGO 105 1 1 5 15
6 6 FARGO 106 1 1 6 3
7 7 FARGO 107 1 2 1 27
8 8 FARGO 108 1 2 2 9
9 9 FARGO 109 1 2 3 24
10 10 FARGO 110 1 2 4 13
11 11 FARGO 111 1 2 5 20
12 12 FARGO 112 1 2 6 1Thank you for the suggestion, I think the output is more comprehensible right now. Please, let me know if you have any questions. Thank you!! Didier Murillo. |
|
Thanks for this update @DidierMurilloF |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Hi,
I am really enjoying the package, and I would like to congratulate all authors on their work. This package has many ideas I had a few years ago; however, with several improvements and covering several experimental designs.
My suggestion here is minimal but can contribute to the output of some functions you have there. I think you should be more explicitly when reporting replication in your output, e.g., function
latin_square()has the following output:In this case, replication output has been reported as list numbers. I think should be useful for end-users to see these numbers actually representing replication numbers. Thus, I did a modification in your function
latin_square()including this information in the output, where the results now is reported as:What do you think about including this modification in other functions you have?
Here is the raw code I've included:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: