<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic Re: proc qlim  vs STATA in SAS Forecasting and Econometrics</title>
    <link>https://communities.sas.com/t5/SAS-Forecasting-and-Econometrics/proc-qlim-vs-STATA/m-p/752884#M4165</link>
    <description>Thank you.</description>
    <pubDate>Thu, 08 Jul 2021 14:46:22 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>Golf</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2021-07-08T14:46:22Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>proc qlim  vs STATA</title>
      <link>https://communities.sas.com/t5/SAS-Forecasting-and-Econometrics/proc-qlim-vs-STATA/m-p/752800#M4163</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi,&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;I'm using the proc qlim to estimate a logit model, where the result show some "." in the "t-value" and p-value as shown below.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;span class="lia-inline-image-display-wrapper lia-image-align-inline" image-alt="Golf_0-1625733601112.png" style="width: 400px;"&gt;&lt;img src="https://communities.sas.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/61057iE715B6DFF2DE4E72/image-size/medium?v=v2&amp;amp;px=400" role="button" title="Golf_0-1625733601112.png" alt="Golf_0-1625733601112.png" /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;I used the same data set with STATA (oglm command), but the result has no problem.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;span class="lia-inline-image-display-wrapper lia-image-align-inline" image-alt="Golf_1-1625733887307.png" style="width: 400px;"&gt;&lt;img src="https://communities.sas.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/61058i6A391AB8E8039126/image-size/medium?v=v2&amp;amp;px=400" role="button" title="Golf_1-1625733887307.png" alt="Golf_1-1625733887307.png" /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp;How should I do in the SAS procedure to remove the problem of "." in the output?&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Thank You&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 08 Jul 2021 08:47:49 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://communities.sas.com/t5/SAS-Forecasting-and-Econometrics/proc-qlim-vs-STATA/m-p/752800#M4163</guid>
      <dc:creator>Golf</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2021-07-08T08:47:49Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: proc qlim  vs STATA</title>
      <link>https://communities.sas.com/t5/SAS-Forecasting-and-Econometrics/proc-qlim-vs-STATA/m-p/752872#M4164</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;I would suggest rescaling the variables term and atotinc. The very small regression coefficients imply a large input value.&amp;nbsp; Rescaling should bring this more into line with the Stata results.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;SteveDenham&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 08 Jul 2021 14:19:34 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://communities.sas.com/t5/SAS-Forecasting-and-Econometrics/proc-qlim-vs-STATA/m-p/752872#M4164</guid>
      <dc:creator>SteveDenham</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2021-07-08T14:19:34Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: proc qlim  vs STATA</title>
      <link>https://communities.sas.com/t5/SAS-Forecasting-and-Econometrics/proc-qlim-vs-STATA/m-p/752884#M4165</link>
      <description>Thank you.</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 08 Jul 2021 14:46:22 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://communities.sas.com/t5/SAS-Forecasting-and-Econometrics/proc-qlim-vs-STATA/m-p/752884#M4165</guid>
      <dc:creator>Golf</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2021-07-08T14:46:22Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

