martin.becker at mx.uni-saarland.de
Thu Feb 7 18:08:05 CET 2008
I guess that you destroy the accuracy of the calculation by the
instead, which results in
jing hua zhao schrieb:
> Dear R list,
> I calculated a two-sided p values according to 2*(1-pnorm(8.104474)), which gives 4.440892e-16. However, it appears to be 5.30E-16 by a colleague and 5.2974E-16 from SAS. I tried to get around with mvtnorm package but it turns out to be using pnorm for univariate case. I should have missed some earlier discussions, but for the moment is there any short answer for a higher precision? Somehow these days, statistical geneticists are infatuated with such tiny p values!
> Many thanks in advance,
> Jing Hua
> Telly addicts unite!
> [[alternative HTML version deleted]]
> R-devel at r-project.org mailing list
More information about the R-devel