I don't think you can say that differing sizes of markers using weights
are correct in any sense except that larger probably means bigger.
What would be correct any way? Radius proportional to size? Area? Stata
uses neither. For example, no rule stops data varying by factors of
10000 (or even much more) and representing both extremes of such a range
"correctly" could mean the largest symbols dominating a graph, the
smallest being unreadable, or both at once.
Be that as it may, I don't think that StataCorp publish their algorithm
any more, so that it is difficult to subvert it.
Nick
[email protected]
Jonathan Schulz
I want to create a scatter plot with the by-option and frequency
weights. Is there a way to calibrate the size of the markers between the
different graphs (so that the size of a marker with a specific weight is
the same in all graphs)? For now the relative frequencies are only
correct within a graph.
Knowing how the min & max of the mark sizes are determined (within one
graph) would allow me to adjust the weights accordingly (together with
the msize option). Thanks a lot in advance!
*
* For searches and help try:
* http://www.stata.com/help.cgi?search
* http://www.stata.com/support/statalist/faq
* http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/
