{"action":"created","issue":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/stan-dev/rstanarm/issues/43","labels_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/stan-dev/rstanarm/issues/43/labels{/name}","comments_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/stan-dev/rstanarm/issues/43/comments","events_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/stan-dev/rstanarm/issues/43/events","html_url":"https://github.com/stan-dev/rstanarm/issues/43","id":124080227,"number":43,"title":"stan_glmer messed up after recent merge","user":{"login":"jgabry","id":7796803,"avatar_url":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/7796803?v=3","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/jgabry","html_url":"https://github.com/jgabry","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/jgabry/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/jgabry/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/jgabry/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/jgabry/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/jgabry/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/jgabry/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/jgabry/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/jgabry/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/jgabry/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"labels":[{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/stan-dev/rstanarm/labels/bug","name":"bug","color":"fc2929"}],"state":"closed","locked":false,"assignee":null,"milestone":null,"comments":5,"created_at":"2015-12-28T15:24:07Z","updated_at":"2015-12-30T00:26:27Z","closed_at":"2015-12-28T19:15:11Z","body":"@bgoodri I'm not sure what's going but after your recent merge for the `posterior_predict` stuff this example\r\n\r\n    stan_lmer(Reaction ~ Days + (Days | Subject), data = sleep study)\r\n\r\nthrows an error. It has something to do with the `_NEW_` terms. We're getting `b[(Intercept) Subject:_NEW_Subject]` but missing the `_NEW_` term for `Days`. "},"comment":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/stan-dev/rstanarm/issues/comments/167904350","html_url":"https://github.com/stan-dev/rstanarm/issues/43#issuecomment-167904350","issue_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/stan-dev/rstanarm/issues/43","id":167904350,"user":{"login":"jgabry","id":7796803,"avatar_url":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/7796803?v=3","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/jgabry","html_url":"https://github.com/jgabry","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/jgabry/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/jgabry/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/jgabry/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/jgabry/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/jgabry/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/jgabry/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/jgabry/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/jgabry/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/jgabry/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"created_at":"2015-12-30T00:26:27Z","updated_at":"2015-12-30T00:26:27Z","body":"Hmm, yeah I'm pretty sure they were working before. At least the travis\nbuild succeeded a few times after they were introduced. Maybe they're just\nreally sensitive to the seed for the rngs called from posterior_predict? I\nthink we've only been setting seeds for the calls to Stan (although I did\nadd a seed argument to posterior_predict).\n\nOn Wed, Dec 30, 2015 at 1:17 AM, bgoodri <notifications@github.com> wrote:\n\n> OK, I fixed all those. The remaining two test failures are\n>\n> 2. Failure (at test_stan_glmer.R#42): stan_lmer returns expected result\n> for slepstudy example\n> 3. Failure (at test_stan_glmer.R#99): stan_glmer.nb ok\n>\n> which seem to just be that we get sufficiently different answers than lme4.\n> But I don't think anything was supposed to have changed with the\n> estimation. Were these working before?\n>\n> On Tue, Dec 29, 2015 at 7:45 AM, Jonah Gabry <notifications@github.com>\n> wrote:\n>\n> > @bgoodri <https://github.com/bgoodri> Cool. Looks ok.\n> >\n> > It looks like some of the posterior_predict tests for stan_(g)lmer are\n> > still failing though. In particular there's an error being thrown about\n> > incorrect dimensions in some cases. For example, for\n> >\n> > fit <- stan_lmer(mpg ~ wt + (1|cyl) + (1 + wt|gear), data = mtcars)\n> >\n> > the last two expect_silent()s in the check_for_error() function in\n> > test_posterior_predict.R fail. The first is\n> >\n> > yrep5 <- posterior_predict(fit, newdata = model.frame(fit)[1:5, ])\n> >\n> > Error in b %*% dat$Zt :\n> > Cholmod error 'X and/or Y have wrong dimensions' at file\n> ../MatrixOps/cholmod_sdmult.c, line 90\n> >\n> > So it looks like the error is being thrown by some C code for sparse\n> > matrix stuff that gets called for b %*% dat$Zt.\n> >\n> > —\n> > Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub\n> > <https://github.com/stan-dev/rstanarm/issues/43#issuecomment-167782154>.\n> >\n>\n> —\n> Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub\n> <https://github.com/stan-dev/rstanarm/issues/43#issuecomment-167903707>.\n>\n"}}