Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

DOC: Explain low df in cluster #6853

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jul 6, 2020
Merged

Conversation

bashtage
Copy link
Member

@bashtage bashtage commented Jul 6, 2020

Explain the low df in cluster

closes #6555

  • closes #xxxx
  • tests added / passed.
  • code/documentation is well formatted.
  • properly formatted commit message. See
    NumPy's guide.

Notes:

  • It is essential that you add a test when making code changes. Tests are not
    needed for doc changes.
  • When adding a new function, test values should usually be verified in another package (e.g., R/SAS/Stata).
  • When fixing a bug, you must add a test that would produce the bug in master and
    then show that it is fixed with the new code.
  • New code additions must be well formatted. Changes should pass flake8. If on Linux or OSX, you can
    verify you changes are well formatted by running
    git diff upstream/master -u -- "*.py" | flake8 --diff --isolated
    
    assuming flake8 is installed. This command is also available on Windows
    using the Windows System for Linux once flake8 is installed in the
    local Linux environment. While passing this test is not required, it is good practice and it help
    improve code quality in statsmodels.
  • Docstring additions must render correctly, including escapes and LaTeX.

Explain the low df in cluster

closes statsmodels#6555
@bashtage bashtage merged commit 0c25f88 into statsmodels:master Jul 6, 2020
@bashtage bashtage deleted the cluster-df branch July 6, 2020 10:44
@coveralls
Copy link

Coverage Status

Coverage increased (+0.007%) to 88.028% when pulling ffeaa79 on bashtage:cluster-df into 524235f on statsmodels:master.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

FAQ: Why are cluster robust p-values so different from those reported by STATA package?
2 participants