Using R - R을 잘 업데이트 하는 법

R을 사용하면서 항상 겪었던 문제는 R이 워낙 잘 관리가 되는 프로그램이라 수시로 R 버전을 업데이트 해야 하는데, 개인적으로 R Studio 에서 업데이트 하려고 했지만 R자체의 업데이트는 별 문제가 없는데, 이전 버전에사 사용하던 패키지들은 같이 업데이트 하기가 쉽지가 않았다는 점이었다.

그래서 여러번 실패를 거듭하면서 얻은 현재까지(!) 최적의 방법은 R업데이트는 R콘솔에서 하는 것이 가장 좋다는 것이다.

아래의 순서로 하면 기 사용하던 각종 패키지 까지 깔끔하게 설치할 수 있다.

1. 윈도우 메뉴창에서 R x64 혹은 R i386중 본인의 컴퓨터에 맞는 프로그램을 선택하여 R Gui를 연다.

2. 열린 RGui 의 R Console 창에서 library(installr) 을 실행한다.
    * 실행이 안될 수 도 있다.  이 때는 install.packages("installr") 을 실행하여 먼저 installr
      패키지를 설치해 주어야 한다.   이 때 CRAN 서버를 선택하라는 선택창이 나올 수
      있다.  본인이 위치한 곳에 가장 가까운 서버를 선택하면 된다.

3. 이제 updateR() 명령을 실행하고 R이 업데이트 되기를 기다린다.  몇 차례의 선택창이
   나오지만 바꾸지 않고 기 설정된 선택으로 계속 다음 다음 한다.

4. 마지막으로 패키지를 업데이트 할 것이냐는 메뉴가 나오는데.... 나는 이 때 네를
   선택하고 기다려 보았지만, 패키지 업데이트가 잘 안되었다.  이 때는 과감히 RGui
   자체를 닫고, 다시 재실행 시킨다.  일단 업데이트된 R버전이 보일 것이다.

5. 이 때 상위 메뉴 중 "패키지들"을 선택하면 하위 메뉴 중 "패키지 업데이트..." 라는
   메뉴가 있는데 이 메뉴를 선택한다.   다시 CRAN 서버를 선택하라는 메뉴가 나올
   것인데 위에서 선택했던 서버를 다시 선택해 준다.

6. 다음은 R Console 창에서 이전 버전에서 사용하던 패키지들이 계속 업데이트 되는
   것을 느긋한 마음으로 기다린다.  패키지를 많이 사용하던 사람들은 업데이트에
   상당한 시간이 걸릴 수도 있으므로 느긋하게 기다리는 것이 필요하다.

7. 마지막으로 완료되면R Gui를 닫고,  R Studio 를 다시 실행한다.  기존 사용하던
   library 가 포함된 아무 R 코드나 돌려본다.  잘 실행되면 성공적으로 전 버전에서
   사용하던 모든 패키지가 업데이트 된 것이다.

Exploering the Value ladder

Exploring The Value Ladder

May 1, 2002 • Leo J. Pusateri

 

Other Articles: Sponsor Insights: 3 Questions That Can Predict Future Quality of Life • Stop With The Phony Slogans

Trending Articles: These Are America's Best Small Cities • These Are The Best Big Cities In The U.S.

Last issue, we discussed the creation of the Value Ladder and how each of the seven steps (or questions) is integral to the next. Your answers to each question are unique to you, and as you climb the Value Ladder, you'll see how the seven steps help you build deeper relationships with your clients. Wouldn't it feel great to be a "black belt" at building client relationships? How would it feel to have that smile-in-your-stomach kind of confidence every time a prospect asks you a question? Can you answer each question with confidence, passion and speed? Do you give the questioner the appropriate answers to his questions without overdoing it and sharing more than necessary? Are you climbing the path toward the coveted strategic partner role?
That smile in your stomach comes from answering the seven questions over and over, tightening up your responses each time. This constant tightening will take you from good ... to great ... to extraordinary ... to being the best you can be.
Let's review all seven questions with some examples to consider for what we call your Virtual File Cabinet, the place in your mind where you store all your Value Ladder answers.
Who Are You?
There's a reason this question is the first rung of the ladder and the bottom drawer of your file cabinet-you need to reach down deep to get the answer! That answer needs to be so genuine that the other person can feel who you are, that an emotional connection is being made that will yield a lasting impression.
My brother Vince's serial number when he was in the Air Force Security Service Unit in Pakistan during the Vietnam War identified him immediately and concisely. Is your description of your identity as quick and confident as a military serial number? Can you deliver it confidently without hesitation? Or are you still winging it?
My typical answer is: "I'm Leo Pusateri, the president of Pusateri Consulting and Training. We are a sales consulting and training organization headquartered in beautiful Buffalo, New York, and we specialize and partner with financial service organizations and financial entrepreneurs to help them compete more effectively on the philosophies of value." In just a few seconds, that answer identifies me and my organization quickly and with certainty.
"Well, Leo, how long have you been doing this?" or "What is your background?" someone might ask in response. Your answers to these follow-up questions can be very deep-something you may not fully realize or appreciate until you've covered all seven questions. If you think of your response as the culmination of a self-actualizing experience, you'll truly be speaking from your core, and everything will fall into place. You'll have a sharper focus and, most important, so will your client.
What Do You Do?
A concise statement or paragraph that clearly captures the essence of what is unique about you and your organization is something we call your Unique Value Proposition (UVP). You should be able to give an individually customized answer, confidently and without hesitation, to a retiree, a widow, a small-business owner, a doctor or anyone else who asks, "What do you do?" I've had clients turn this question into a constant game. The daily quizzing forces you to be quick, accurate and confident.
One of my clients spent a good deal of money and time developing her organization's brand. While on a cross-country flight, she sat next to a senior executive affiliated with a major sports organization. When the executive asked, "What do you do?" she was really caught off guard. It amazed her to think how challenging it still was, after investing so many dollars developing the brand, to answer basic questions about the firm's distinction with clarity and to answer with confidence, passion and speed.
Why Do You Do What You Do?
"Why do you feel so strongly about that?" or "Why do you do things this way?" Automatic answers to these questions tend to be "Because I love this business" or "Because I love helping people." But the answer to this question should reflect why you do what you do, not how much you care for your clients. That's an appropriate response, but you'll find that it will be more appropriately positioned later in the Value Ladder.
Your business beliefs represent the compelling story of your business. They help you tighten your UVP so that it communicates your philosophical beliefs and your thought processes. As a trusted Financial Entrepreneur, you should be prepared to answer any question regarding your UVP and your business beliefs and be able to defend any part of it. For instance, if a client asks you why you believe in asset allocation, you should be able to give concrete answers and to also cite studies that statistically show the investment performance attribution assigned to asset allocation. Can you see how this kind of top-gun preparedness would distinguish you from your competition?
How Do You Do What You Do?
As I related in the previous issue, people usually have their own processes for making decisions regarding their financial strategic partners. You should be an expert in articulating your process to prospects. You'll be amazed at the confidence you will develop when you can precisely illustrate your process and the value inherent in it. Your prospects who become clients will pay you a fair fee for your value.
Can you illustrate your process to your clients on a flip chart? Can you make the buying decision a memorable experience for them? By being able to expertly illustrate your process, you create a relationship that feels good. The clients benefiting from that relationship become advocates. They are buying YOU. You are the value. You are the process. And they want to share that value and your process with their friends.
Who Have You Done It For?
At a regional brokerage firm's golf outing, I said to one of the firm's top producers, "Tell me about your clients." He said, "What do you want to know?" "Who is your ideal client?" I asked. "Who really pumps you up? Who do you enjoy working with the most?" His response was interesting. "I don't know. How do we even figure that out? Who should we be telling our compelling story of value to in the future?"
This is a good time to revisit your Virtual File Cabinet. Drawer No. 5 should include success stories about your existing clients that you can share (while protecting their confidentiality) with new prospects. Do you know their lifetime value to you? Are you convinced that they are convinced that you add value?
How would these clients' describe why they decided to do business with you to current prospects? What if your prospect asked them what they value the most about you? Ultimately, what if your prospects asked your key clients what the real value was that you provided to them? Do you know the answers to these questions? You had better if you truly want to be on top of your game.
What Makes You Different?
"So, Leo, what makes you different?" was a question I was asked rather challengingly during a lunch presentation to a group of FEs. "I can distinguish myself in three ways-through my company, my solutions and through my personal level of differentiation," was my answer. "Where would you like me to focus?" I continued. I had used my conversational proficiency to convey my expertise.
Visualize an umbrella. The top of the umbrella represents your company. The metal spokes underneath represent all the solutions you provide. The person/team holding the umbrella (the most important person for you to distinguish) is YOU. A top consultant in our industry successfully closed a half-billion dollar family office opportunity by offering all the spokes and services that distinguished him and his company. He provided unique value to his client. He truly had his act together.
Why Should I Do Business With You?
The question, "Why should I do business with you?" is challenging by nature. But remember, business is first a meeting of the hearts, then a meeting of the minds. Connect with your clients emotionally and logically, and you have aligned your value to the value they are seeking.
Real value is developed qualitatively and measured quantitatively. Discussing estate-planning issues, creating a legacy and addressing issues of charity are qualitative examples. Developing an investment policy statement for a client with a half-million dollars who wants to grow it to a million is quantitative.
Putting the word "real" in front of the word "value" makes the concept come alive. Always remember to go beyond the old feature/benefit explanation. Stretch yourself to achieve the answers to what it really means to your clients. Accentuating the 'real' in front of the word value forces you to think like that.
Now ... You're Top Gun!
Isn't it exhilarating when you know you've really achieved your goal? You've delved deep and accomplished a lot through the Value Ladder process. You've developed a Virtual File Cabinet full of answers you can deliver on any occasion with confidence, passion and speed. Using the Value Ladder and your Virtual File Cabinet to build world-class relationships with your clients will distinguish you from your competition. You'll have more fun in your business. Most important, you'll be delivering real value!
Leo Pusateri is president of Pusateri Consulting and Training LLC in Buffalo, N.Y., and is author of Mirror Mirror on the Wall Am I the Most Valued of Them All?


https://www.fa-mag.com/news/article-500.html 

2018년 10대 트렌드…'한반도 신경제지도' 현실 가능성 ↑

2018년 10대 트렌드…'한반도 신경제지도' 현실 가능성 ↑

2018년 눈여겨봐야 할 테크 트렌드, 'CES 2018 Tech Trend to Watch'에서 소개

http://kr.aving.net/news/view.php?articleId=1382936

inequalities-in-longevity-by-gender-and-education

Statistical Insights: Large inequalities in longevity by gender and education in OECD countries

9 March 2017

tags: inequality, life expectancy, longevity

by Guest author

OECD Statistics Directorate

Click for more Statistical Insights

While differences in average longevity, or life expectancy, between countries are well-documented, inequalities in longevity within countries are less well-understood and are not fully comparable beyond a handful of European countries. A recent OECD working paper (Murtin et al., 2017) fills this gap by analysing inequalities in longevity by education and gender in 23 OECD countries in 2011.
Measures of inequalities in longevity show that, on average, the gap in life expectancy between high and low-educated people is equal to 8 years for men and 5 years for women at the age of 25 years; and  3.5 years for men and 2.5 years for women at the age of 65. Cardio-vascular diseases, the primary cause of death for the over 65s, are the primary cause of mortality inequality between the high and low-education elderly.
Key findings
Figure 1 shows the longevity gaps between high and low-educated people at the age of 25 and 65. At age 25, life expectancy is 48.9 years for men with low education, 52.6 years for those with medium education and 56.6 years for those with high education. The corresponding figures for women are 55.5 years, 58.3 years and 60.1 years respectively.
Longevity gaps differ markedly across countries. High-educated 25 year-old men for example can expect to live more than 11 years longer than their low-educated counterparts in Latvia, Poland, the Czech Republic and Hungary, while the gap is  less than  5 years in Portugal, Turkey, Italy, New Zealand and Mexico. In the case of women, inequalities in life expectancy are relatively small in Austria, Israel, Portugal and Italy, but amount to over 6 years in Latvia, Poland, Belgium and Chile.
Large inequalities in longevity by education persist even at older ages. At 65 years, life expectancy for men, on average in the OECD, is 15.8 years for those with low education, 17.1 for those with medium education and 19.2 years for those with high education. The corresponding figures for women are 19.6, 20.8 and 21.9 years. In relative terms, i.e. expressed as a share of the remaining lifespan, gaps in longevity are larger at 65 than at 25.
While differences in average life span (i.e. longevity or life expectancy) between groups of education and gender are large, this masks wider differences in life span within groups when other factors, such as genetics and exposure to risk factors are taken into account. Indeed, combined, education and gender, only account for around 10% of the total variation in lifespan.

Breaking down mortality rates (measured as the probability of death in a given year) of people aged between 65 and 89 years by causes of death (circulatory causes such as heart failure, neoplasms or cancer, external causes such as accidents, and other causes) reveals that circulatory problems are the leading cause of death for both gender and education groups (Figure 2). Indeed they account for about 40% of total mortality, with neoplasms and other causes of death accounting for between 25% and 30%. Circulatory problems are slightly more prevalent among the low-educated, for both men and women.
Focusing on low-educated older men, circulatory problems are the most frequent cause of death in high-mortality countries such as Latvia, the Czech Republic, Poland and Hungary, where they account for around half of all deaths, as compared to around one third of deaths in Canada (28%), the United Kingdom (30%), Norway (37%) and Turkey (31%). Conversely, other causes of death are relatively more prevalent in low-mortality countries.
Circulatory problems are also the main factor explaining the mortality gap between education groups at older age. For elderly people, circulatory diseases contribute to 41% of the difference in mortality rates between low and high-educated men and 49% between low and high educated women.
Addressing the risk factors underlying circulatory diseases, in particular smoking, seems as an efficient way of reducing both average mortality rates and inequalities in longevity across education groups. According to Mackenbach (2016), smoking accounts for up to half of the observed inequalities in mortality rates in some European countries; also, while its contribution to inequalities in longevity has decreased in most countries for men, it has increased among women.


 The measure explained
Longevity is statistically defined as the average number of years remaining at a given age. It is calculated as the mean length of life of a hypothetical cohort assumed to be exposed since starting age until death of all their members to the mortality rates observed at a given year. Mortality rate is a measure of the number of deaths in a particular population, scaled to the size of that population, per unit of time.
Estimates of life expectancy by education are drawn from data compiled in different ways in different countries. Two main approaches (study design) can be distinguished:

1. A “cross-sectional’ (unlinked) design implies that information on the socio-economic characteristic of the deceased is drawn directly from death certificates, as reported by relatives or public officials, while population numbers for the same population categories (the denominator of mortality rates) are drawn from the most recent population censuses. An obvious drawback of this “unlinked” design, which is still used by most countries reviewed in the accompanying OECD working paper, is that it can only be implemented when death certificates include information on the occupation and education of the deceased. In addition, even when this information is included in death certificates, it may be affected by (large) recording errors;
2. A “linked design” implies that socio-economic information on the deceased is retrieved by individual data linkage to the most recent population census or administrative register records. While both types of data are used in this study the “linked approach” is generally associated with higher quality data. Beyond these differences, a number of data treatments are implemented to correct for statistical biases and anomalies that may arise when calculating mortality rates based on a small number of deceased with specific age, gender and education characteristics.

The measure of inequalities in longevity described above have two specific features that may affect cross-country comparisons: first, life expectancy is disproportionately affected by mortality rates at very young ages compared to mortality rates at older ages; second, measures of life expectancy by education are also affected by the fact that distributions of education vary across countries and time. Alternative measures of inequalities in longevity have been examined, and they all show very large correlations across countries. In other terms, accounting for differences in the size of the various educational groups or using average mortality rates rather than life expectancy measures, does not change the assessment of countries’ rankings significantly. There are also significant cross-country differences between these measures of inequality in longevity and more traditional measures of inequality in, for example, income: longevity inequality are lowest in Italy, where income inequality is relatively high, and highest in many Eastern European countries, where income inequality is relatively low.
Where to find the underlying data
The underlying data can be found online at the following address: www.oecd.org/std/Inequalities-in-longevity-by-education-in-OECD-countries.xlsx
Useful links
Mackenbach, J.P. (2016), Health Inequalities in Europe, Erasmus University Publishing, Rotterdam
Murtin, F., Mackenbach, J.P., Jasilionis, D. and M. Mira d’Ercole  (2017), “Inequalities in Longevity by Education in OECD Countries: Insights from New OECD Estimates”, OECD Statistics Working Papers, 2017/2, OECD Publishing, Paris .

AI비서 마음을 얻는자, 물건을 판다

AI 마음을 얻는 자 물건을 판다

Five Dangerous Lessons from Steve Jobs

Steven Jobs