<?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: Predictions from Proc QLIM in Statistical Procedures</title>
    <link>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/Predictions-from-Proc-QLIM/m-p/229582#M12096</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;Have you tried Poisson and negaiive binomial counts models (available with many procedures, such as COUNTREG)?&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Mon, 12 Oct 2015 19:51:02 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>PGStats</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2015-10-12T19:51:02Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Predictions from Proc QLIM</title>
      <link>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/Predictions-from-Proc-QLIM/m-p/229580#M12095</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;My dependent variable contains positive integers truncated at 1. It is also quite skewed. The n is small with 48 observations. My first try was a multiplicative (log-log) model. Thinking I could improve on the Mean Squared Error, I tried quantile regression at the 25th percentile. This had the positive effect of reducing the MSE by 33% versus the OLS multiplicate model, but had the undesireable result of producing some negative predictions. So, I tried Proc QLIM specifying a truncated lower bound equal to 1, thinking that any predictions from this procedure would be constrained at the lower bound.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I was wrong. Proc QLIM produces negative predictions in spite of a lower bound at 1. This result is unexpected and surprising. The documentation doesn't address the issue.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;What am I missing here?&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 12 Oct 2015 19:18:28 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/Predictions-from-Proc-QLIM/m-p/229580#M12095</guid>
      <dc:creator>xtc283x</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2015-10-12T19:18:28Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Predictions from Proc QLIM</title>
      <link>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/Predictions-from-Proc-QLIM/m-p/229582#M12096</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Have you tried Poisson and negaiive binomial counts models (available with many procedures, such as COUNTREG)?&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 12 Oct 2015 19:51:02 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/Predictions-from-Proc-QLIM/m-p/229582#M12096</guid>
      <dc:creator>PGStats</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2015-10-12T19:51:02Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Predictions from Proc QLIM</title>
      <link>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/Predictions-from-Proc-QLIM/m-p/229583#M12097</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;I have not tried those but they are good suggestions which I will pursue. Regardless, I'm still curious about why QLIM is giving me negative predictions. Any insights?&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 12 Oct 2015 19:58:06 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://communities.sas.com/t5/Statistical-Procedures/Predictions-from-Proc-QLIM/m-p/229583#M12097</guid>
      <dc:creator>xtc283x</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2015-10-12T19:58:06Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

