search for: stabilization

I have made program code for Vector Auto Regressive in terms of completing my undergraduate program using R. I have an important question related to my project. If I have: data(Canada) var.2c <- VAR(Canada, p = 2, type = "const") var.2c.stabil <- stability(var.2c, type = "OLS-CUSUM") I want to get the value of plot(var.2c.stabil). Can you help

Dear R users, I'm interested in measuring the stability of a heirarchical clustering, of the overall clustering and finding sub clusters (from cutting the heirarchical clustering at different levels) which demonstrate stability. I saw some postings on the R help from a while back about bootstrapping for clustering (using sample and generating a consesus tree with a web based tool CONSENSE)

Good afternoon, Apologies if this topic has come up before but I've found that the Firefox 45.1.0 stability to be somewhat lacking. For example, I can't use it for Twitter because it crashes. It also crashes when I log into gmail. This happens every time I try these URL's. Any suggestions on improving the stability? Thanks! Jeff

I've reading this lists few months. We are small company, that makes some system intregration, development and deployments in VoIP scene. Completely under linux. Today i have 6 machines with asterisk, huge test base - including devices like AS5350, Audiocodes gateways, ATAs, IP phones ... Now is time to make a decition for including * in our future projects. Main goal for us is the Stability.

I would like to hear from anyone good or bad as what their experience has been in recent times with STABILITY of current builds of Asterisk and drivers for TDM400P. The sort of configuration is: 6 incoming POTS lines. ie. 2 TDM400P cards. I am not concerned with: price points, or the advantages or disadvantages of using POTS vs ISDN technology, but simply RELIABILITY & stability of the

Hello, one of our developers is developing his Web applications (PHP-based+MySql) on 64-bit Fedora. He would like to use the same, 64-bit environment on CentOS. I am not against 64-bits (we use it for many, many years using Solaris) but what concerns me is the stability of 64-bit Linux. Can you share your experience regarding stability of 32-bit and 64-bit CentOS ? Does anybody use 64-bit CentOS

? Hello people!! I'm trying to make a statistical analysis of stability through to package 'Agricolae', and procedure 'stability.par', but I don't get conclude the analysis. The problem is in my data set, that have missing value, and I didn't manage interpret the 'NA' used to assign missing value. Someone have any suggestion to solve the

Oops - I should have mentioned that I'm running C6 (I do need to upgrade at some point). Jeff > On Fri, May 06, 2016 at 02:54:06PM -0400, Jeff Layton wrote: >> Good afternoon, >> >> Apologies if this topic has come up before but I've found >> that the Firefox 45.1.0 stability to be somewhat lacking. >> >> For example, I can't use it for Twitter

On Sun, Aug 16, 2015 at 10:34 PM, deadal nix via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > 2015-08-16 21:51 GMT-07:00 Eric Christopher <echristo at gmail.com>: >> >> The promise of stability. We don't promise that the C++ API will stay >> stable. >> > > > Why was that promise be made in the first place ? Has it been made in the >

Hi All, I wanted to send a follow-up mail to the C API discussion/BoF that we had at the latest developer meeting and nicely hosted by Justin and Juergen. We were able to reach consensus on a number of questions/concerns about the C API so I’m going to go ahead and list them for posterity and for any further discussion here: Stability Guarantees: The C API is, in general, a “best effort” for

Something that would be good to get clarity on: The RISC-V backend recently had a bugfix patch that got backported to the 10.0.1 branch. The original patch introduced a new virtual method in TargetLowering.h, and the backported patch [1] was rewritten to avoid changing the ABI of libLLVM.so. This feels like some kind of policy decision about the C++ ABI beyond "it's entirely

Hi all: I solved the previous stated problem in something of a brute force way (but it works). I seem to now be running into one little hiccup using reshape. Here is a quick snip of the data in long format: grade stability year schid 6 Grade 4 3 2001 100005 7 Grade 4 3 2002 100005 8 Grade 4 2 2003 100005 10 Grade 5 2 2001 100005 11 Grade 5

With regard to Martin's comment about the strength of (base) R: I have R code I wrote 15+ years ago that has been used regularly ever since with only a few minor changes needed due to changes in R. Within that code, I find particularly impressive for its stability a simple custom GUI that uses the tcltk package that has needed no updates whatsoever in all that time. Such stability and

We've had a lot of churn in all the trunks (llvm, llvm-gcc, clang) recently, and the testing buildbots have been failing repeatedly. I spoke with Chris this AM, and he suggested we have a "stabilization day." Please avoid large, destabilizing changes for about twenty-four hours. We would like for the testing bots to begin working again. Thanks, stuart

Just in case anyone else on this list is running into similar issues, I can confirm that the patch appears to have resolved this. I've opened https://bugs.centos.org/view.php?id=13713 It was so bad that having the system under load (with rpmbuild) and opening another ssh window or two would almost always cause the oops. Cheers, Nathan From: CentOS-virt

On Jul 15, 2009, at 11:52 AMPDT, Stuart Hastings wrote: > We've had a lot of churn in all the trunks (llvm, llvm-gcc, clang) > recently, and the testing buildbots have been failing repeatedly. > > I spoke with Chris this AM, and he suggested we have a "stabilization > day." Please avoid large, destabilizing changes for about twenty-four > hours. We would like for the testing bots to begin working again. OK. I wonder if we might be able to automate the stabilization somewhat. I'm not at all sure this can be done without introducing worse...

The Developer Policy document (https://llvm.org/docs/DeveloperPolicy.html) contains a Section "C API Changes". There is no corresponding section for C++ API Changes. LLVM is somewhat different from most libraries in that the main language is C++ but the C++ API is not guaranteed to be stable in any shape or form from what I understand. I think it would be useful to have a "C++ API

Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de wrote > Linux does not implement stable kernel interfaces. It may be that there is > an intention to do so but I''ve seen problems on Linux resulting from > self-incompatibility on a regular base. To be precise, Linus tries hard to prevent ABI changes in the system call interfaces exported from the kernel, but the glibc team had defeated

"Documentation: We’re going to document this policy in the developer documentation. In addition, any changes to the C API will require documentation in the release notes so that it’s clear to external users who do not follow the project how the C API is changing and evolving." So, yes? -eric On Thu, Nov 19, 2015 at 5:55 PM Sean Silva <chisophugis at gmail.com> wrote: > Are

Hi, I'm seeing numerous crashes on the xen 4.6.6-1 / 4.6.6-2 releases, on both the 4.9.34-29 and 4.9.39-29 kernels. I've attached a txt with two different servers outputs. Xen-028: This crashed this morning while running 4.6.6-1 and 4.9.39-29 Xen-001: This crashed shortly after being upgraded to 4.6.6-2 and 4.9.34-29 Both are on different hardware platforms, and have had a