Rounding [Software]

posted by d_labes  – Berlin, Germany, 2013-01-02 13:51 (4560 d 03:14 ago) – Posting: # 9777
Views: 13,492

(edited on 2013-01-03 09:31)

Hi Helmut!

❝ How does your software round?


I'm currently not in reach of my SAS but I strongly suppose that it will give 125.01 if one uses the ordinary ROUND() function. To be in accordance with the R method (or other software) one has to use the ROUNDE() function which rounds to even.

❝ Mine:

Excel 2000:       round(125.005, 2) → 125.01


Excel 2010:       round(125.005,2)    → 125.01
[edit]Just checked (03-Jan-2013)
SAS 9.2:          round(125.005,0.01) → 125.01
(Note the definition of rounding to 2 decimals as rounding to multiples of 0.01)
[/edit]

OO Calc:          round(125.005, 2) → 125.01

❝ ...

R 2.15.2:         round(125.005, 2) → 125.00


Seems the R folks did it again the way different from what all others do :cool:.

❝ In normal life not sooo important


A more drastically example, may be important also in normal life I think:
round(c(0.5,1.5,2.5,3.5,4.5,5.5),0)
[1] 0 2 2 4 4 6

At least in Germany one would expect:
[1] 1 2 3 4 5 6

❝ ... but in simulations. Example (106 sim’s, empiric alpha ~ T/R 1.25 in conventional balanced cross-overs).

 n   CV   alpha        alpha

         no rounding  CI rounded

42  15%  0.049842     0.050746 (sig. >0.05)

36  17%  0.050010     0.050706 (sig. >0.05)


Wow! Seems rounding the CI anyhow is not such a good idea.
[edit]Also the rounding seems to be implied by regulatory definitions of the acceptance range as 80.00 - 125.00 (EMA & FDA)![/edit]

But ... IMHO this must be independent from the used rounding method for 5 except the magnitude of deviation from the not rounded results since all the other results >125.0000 - 125.0049 will be also counted as BE if rounded and as not BE if not rounded.

Regards,

Detlew

Complete thread:

UA Flag
Activity
 Admin contact
23,424 posts in 4,927 threads, 1,686 registered users;
45 visitors (0 registered, 45 guests [including 7 identified bots]).
Forum time: 18:05 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

Complex, statistically improbable things are by their nature
more difficult to explain than
simple, statistically probable things.    Richard Dawkins

The Bioequivalence and Bioavailability Forum is hosted by
BEBAC Ing. Helmut Schütz
HTML5