Fix subscript out of bounds in predict() for stepwise models with i() - #673
Open
SAY-5 wants to merge 1 commit into
Open
Fix subscript out of bounds in predict() for stepwise models with i()#673SAY-5 wants to merge 1 commit into
SAY-5 wants to merge 1 commit into
Conversation
Signed-off-by: Sai Asish Y <say.apm35@gmail.com>
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Fixes #672.
predict(newdata = ...)errored with "subscript out of bounds" when the model was extracted from a stepwise estimation containingi(), e.g.reg <- feols(am ~ sw(wt + i(cyl), wt + i(cyl)), mtcars); predict(reg[[1]], newdata = mtcars).The
i()level check inpredict()looped overseq_along(object$model_matrix_info)while indexingmm_info_new(the info rebuilt fromnewdata). For a stepwise model the stored list can hold more entries than the rebuilt one, somm_info_new[[i]]went past the end. I bound the loop to the entries present in both lists, which keeps the existing check on newi()levels intact.Added a regression test in the PREDICT chunk. I don't have a local toolchain to build the package's C++ here, so I couldn't run the full suite, but the change is a one-line bound on the loop and the test mirrors the existing
i()prediction tests.