Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Hi Varun Satish,
The issues was solved. There was another pull request on this (changing slashes) and I have just merged it with the core file. However, thank you for the communication and willingness to engage! And indeed, a fork-push way should be the best in such cases.
Good luck with the work!
Konrad
Hi Ethan,
Indeed, I have not yet integrated the latest wave of PSID. This spring, we published CPF ver. 1.5, but PSID 2021 was not yet available during our work, so it’s not included. Unfortunately, I am not able to do it in the next months myself. It’s possible that the code will be updated by external users (please let us know if you have done it! or add modification through a branch in GitHub), so it can be added to the main CPF code. If not, I hope next year to get some funding to organize an update.
Best,
KonradHi Michael,
great idea! Thank you for noticing it. Indeed, a small but nice improvement. As this is a minor technical issue, it will be easy for me to include it in the updated version myself without replacing files now. However, if you want to do it, I suggest using GitHub and editing the existing code. But as I can see, Github does not support automatic replacement; thus it may be much faster to do it for me in Stata with automatic replacement (and not miss any “\”!).
Good luck with the analysis!
Konrad
Hi Stella,
indeed, there may be confusion. The Manual is not yet updated to version 1.4. The latest waves from the US and GER added in CPF 1.4 have some small differences in the data structure. My advice is to first go country-by-county and then file-by-file (syntax codes) to locate the error. It’s best to run the syntax directly from the lower-level (not through the higher-level interface) because then Stata shows more informative error messages. Usually, such problems require just a correction in the file’s or folder’s name. If you find that this is a problem with the published CPF code, please let me know so I can correct it.
Best and good luck,Konrad
Hi Kim,
I updated the Comparative Panel File (#CPF ver 1.3, https://cpfdata.com) to include the latest versions of data released in 2021 for AUS, KOR, RUS, SWT and UK (HILDA v190, KLIPS v22, RLMS v 2019, SHPv21 and UKHLS v10).
This should solve the problem for UKHLS.
Best,
KonradHi Kim, thanks for informing me about it. Maybe you are using the latest wave of UKHLS wave 10? CPF v.1.1 is not yet updated to the versions of data that were released in 2021. For UKHLS, it works on wave 9. I think this may the reason for this error. However, incorporating new waves for UKHLS should be fairly easy (see the Manual, code updates are required in the high-level syntax to define the number of waves). If you figure it out, please share the code so that others can benefit from it.
Unfortunately, CPF has currently no financing and staff to update the code on regular basis. However, we believe in the community-based effort to progress it (an open-source code social experiment!). One way or another, updates to the code can be expected in Autumn.
Good luck with your research!
KonradHi Ethan,
indeed, the newest wave of the PSID is not yet included in the CPF. Unfortunately, PSID is the most complex and demanding dataset to add, since all variables have wave-specific names. Thus, they have to updated separately by hand, one after another.
We hope to be able to update it in the next weeks.Best,
Konrad (CPF team)I checked it all and introduced several minor changes. You have well figured out how it all works! Doing it all step-by-step is the best idea. I included the changes in version 1.1 of the code. It seems to be running smoothly. The Manual was also updated with some additional instructions (ver. 1.2).
–About SOEP version–
Indeed, the CPF v.1.0 was prepared for SOEP ver. 35. So if you have an older version, you first need to change: “
2_CPF_Main__Fill_and_run.do” –> A.1. global soep_w “35” –> change to 34 or older.
However, as you noticed, the names of variables have been changing from wave to wave, and you need to take care of this yourself.
Fortunately, for SOEP it’s not a major concern.–About the size of files and computer-power limitations–
Yes, UKHLS or SOEP have some very large files. I decided not to drop too many variables at the beginning to provide an opportunity to add some variables to the CPF. However, when your computer says “NO”, it’s good to keep only the necessary variables at the end of “01_Prepare_data.do”.Thanks once more.
Sure, I already added it to the syntax at the Github. I was also wondering why it has not shown me any errors with the delimit problem or other problems you have listed in the separate topic (I have run the program several times). But anyway, this is a great help.
Thank you Gert, this is a great contribution! I’ll incorporate your suggestion to the code and improve instructions. This will be posted as an updated release of the code with credits for you, Gert.
I am also very happy for the feedback because this is the best way to really evaluate and correct such a complex syntax.Thank you Gert. I corrected this. However, it seems it worked with Stata 16 even without this correction. Therefore I haven’t noticed it. Thanks!
