2
$\begingroup$
Error in boxcox.default(y ~ x) : response variable must be positive

I am getting this error in R when I am performing a Box-Cox transformation on data.

Why is this error happening? Here is my data.

This is a time series data and I have to perform logarithmic regression of the form:

$$y=a+b(\log x_1)+c(\log x_2)$$

I need to find a, b, c and then, check if any such type of relation exists or not.

$\endgroup$
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ As the error message says, you're getting this error because there are negative values in your response vector $y$. When the Box-Cox procedure determines which transformation to use, it uses the geometric mean $(y_1\cdot y_2\cdots y_n)^{1/n}$ in the computation. The geometric mean is only defined when all $y_i$ are positive, as taking roots of negative numbers may lead to imaginary/complex numbers. Therefore all $y_i$ must be positive in order to use Box-Cox. $\endgroup$ – MånsT Jan 9 '13 at 9:49
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ You might want to look into the related Yeo-Johnson transformation within the boxCox function in the package car, and the yjpower function in the same package $\endgroup$ – Glen_b Feb 15 '14 at 7:49
4
$\begingroup$

Yes, the boxcox only works with positive values for the response variable $Y$. More details can be found in wikipedia. To workaround this limitation, you can try to predict a shifted version $Y+\mu$ (with $\mu \gt \min Y$) of your variable instead.

A quick code example:

library(MASS)

## Invent example for x and y
y = c(rnorm(100,3,300), rnorm(30,1600,400))
x = 1:length(y)
## Histogram of y shows that y is skewed
hist(y)
## Define parameters for boxcox
eps = 1e-5
n = 100;
mu = seq(-min(y) + eps, max(y), length = n)
lambda = seq(0, 5, length = n)
## Initialize then calculate log likelihood values
lik = matrix(0, n, n)
for (i in 1:n) lik[, i] = boxcox((y + mu[i])~x, lambda = lambda, plotit = FALSE)$y
## Plot log likelihood values
image(lik, xlab = "mu", ylab = "lambda", main = "likelihood")
$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Thank you ..I will try it..Is the result equivalent to log transformation ? Can you give any link or explanation with sample data.It would be of great help :))) $\endgroup$ – Komal Jan 9 '13 at 11:52
  • $\begingroup$ $\lambda = \mu = 0$ will be equivalent to a log transformation but in the general case, it is going to be different. You can try to run the example with any vector $y$ and $x$ that have the same size. $\endgroup$ – ThePawn Jan 10 '13 at 0:12
  • $\begingroup$ Sample data file link : LINK FOR DATA FILE ON WHICH I WANT TO PERFORM THE OPERATION.This is time series data and i have to perform logarithmic regression of form y=a+b(logx1)+c(logx2). and find a,b,c and then check is there any such type of relation exists or not. $\endgroup$ – Komal Jan 11 '13 at 5:35
  • $\begingroup$ Please help. I have given the link for the data file. $\endgroup$ – Komal Jan 11 '13 at 5:37
  • $\begingroup$ @ThePawn The edit by geneorama appears to be an improvement, but is quite extensive. Can you please double-check that you're happy that it doesn't radically alter the meaning of your answer? $\endgroup$ – Glen_b Feb 15 '14 at 0:11

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.