similar to: Uninformative error msgs w/ svm.default - Error in svm.default ... y must be a vector or a factor -

On Tue, 2015-04-21 at 11:46 -0600, Andy Jacobson (NOAA Affiliate) wrote: > Hi, > > I'm encountering trouble compiling caTools_1.17.1.tar.gz and > e1071_1.6-4.tar.gz on a Linux system using the Intel compiler suite. > 14 other packages I generally use installed without any trouble. I > notice both of these trouble packages have a C++ component, so I > wonder if that might

Hi Martyn, Thanks for your insight, that seems pretty direct. Unfortunately, I did not compile this version of R (it's on a large supercomputer system and this version of R was installed by the admins). Using "R CMD config", I see the following relevant settings: DYLIB_LD = icc -std=gnu99 DYLIB_LDFLAGS = -shared -openmp LDFLAGS = -L/opt/compilers/intel/cce/9.1.039/lib

Hi, I'm encountering trouble compiling caTools_1.17.1.tar.gz and e1071_1.6-4.tar.gz on a Linux system using the Intel compiler suite. 14 other packages I generally use installed without any trouble. I notice both of these trouble packages have a C++ component, so I wonder if that might be the issue. Below, there's information on my platform, compiler, and some diagnostic output showing

** save image Error in loadNamespace(i[[1]], c(lib.loc, .libPaths()), keep.source) : There is no package called 'class' Using 30 May 2004 developer version of R-1.9.0 trying URL `http://cran.r-project.org/src/contrib/e1071_1.4-0.tar.gz' Content type `application/x-tar' length 325388 bytes opened URL .......... .......... .......... .......... .......... ..........

I am trying to implement a simple r-svm example using the iris data (only two of the classes are taken and data is within the code). I am running into some errors. I am not an expert on svm's. If any one has used it, I would appreciate their help. I am appending the code below. Thanks../Murli ####################################################### ### R-code for R-SVM ### use leave-one-out

Dear list, yet another question on S4 method behaviour or rather its side effects: Consider the following example (see below) where a new S4 method 'predict' is defined which by doing so makes 'predict' a S4 standardGeneric. It works and simple test examples run but I'm cautious whether this is a 'silly' thing to do. Is this a dangerous thing to do, already known to

In R 1.9.0 running under Solaris 2.9 on a SunBlade 100, with "Sun WorkShop 6 update 2 C++ 5.3 2001/05/15" as the C++ compiler, I just did > install.packages("e1071") The output includes these lines, which I have wrapped to fit nicely in mail: ** libs cc -I/users/local/lib/R/include -I/usr/local/include -KPIC -xlibmil \ -dalign -xO4 -c cmeans.c -o cmeans.o cc

Dear All: I found a problem with the SVM internal cross-validation (CV) accuracy estimation in the e1071 package. File: Rsvm.c Line: 120 Today, it is: int j = rand()%(prob->l-i); Should be: int j = i + rand()%(prob->l-i); The erroneous code doesn't shuffle objects. Instead, it "randomly" moves objects from beginning to the end. In hope for a prompt response from the

Full_Name: Uwe F. Mayer Version: 2.9.1 OS: SunOS myhost 5.10 Generic_120012-14 i86pc i386 i86pc Solaris Submission from: (NULL) (216.113.168.130) Configuration problem with the creation of shared libraries: Compilation only succeeds if SHLIB_LDFLAGS="-shared" is added to the configure command line. This is likely due to a wellknown gcc-4 feature, in that gcc requires -shared and not

I just saw the following using R version 2.4.1 (2006-12-18) in output from R CMD check. * checking Rd files ... WARNING Error in as.vector(x, mode) : invalid argument 'mode' Execution halted See the chapter 'Writing R documentation files' in manual 'Writing R Extensions'. In looking at the help page (the only one in the package so far) I noticed that

Hi, When building this Bioconductor package with R-devel: http://www.bioconductor.org/packages/devel/bioc/src/contrib/ROntoTools_1.1.2.tar.gz I get the following: [...] Error: processing vignette ?rontotools.Rnw? failed with diagnostics: ?x? must be an atomic vector Execution halted If I install the package, Stangle and then source the vignette, I see that the "real" error is:

I observed the same behavior as Edward this morning with R-1.2.2 on Red Hat Linux 7.0. There appears to be a problem with the library in netpbm-9.5-5, even after hunting down the missing shhopt.h that pbmplus.h is looking for. I worked around the problem by compiling e1071 without pbm support (moved pbm.c to pbm.c.bak). Matt Matthew R. Nelson, Ph.D. Director, Information Systems Esperion

I observed the same behavior as Edward this morning with R-1.2.2 on Red Hat Linux 7.0. There appears to be a problem with the library in netpbm-9.5-5, even after hunting down the missing shhopt.h that pbmplus.h is looking for. I worked around the problem by compiling e1071 without pbm support (moved pbm.c to pbm.c.bak). Matt Matthew R. Nelson, Ph.D. Director, Information Systems Esperion

Hello, I'm on a Gentoo machine with the latest beta nVidia 9625 Drivers, trying to get Compiz to work with AIGLX... simply running 'compiz', or even with the addition of any options other than version, causes compiz to detect that it is indeed not XGL, and then segmentation faults... please note that I have only currently tried this with Compiz-Quinnstorm (the latest package available

Hi R-colleagues. In the sem-package i have a problem to introduce hidden variables. As a simple example I take an ordinary factor analysis. The program: cmat=c(0.14855886, 0.05774635, 0.08003300, 0.04900990, 0.05774635, 0.18042029, 0.11213013, 0.03752475, 0.08003300, 0.11213013, 0.24646337, 0.03609901, 0.04900990, 0.03752475, 0.03609901, 0.31702970)

This mailbox is unmonitored. Mail sent to this address is not received or read. I am unable to offer support for general technical issues via private e-mail. I only provide support via the newsgroups, so that others may benefit from the solution to a given problem. In addition, many others will see your post, and may have an answer that I do not. If your message was a follow up to a post I

Hi list, Could someone help me to explain why the leave-one-out cross validation results I got from svm using the internal option "cross" are different from those I got manually? It seems using "cross" to do cross validation, the results are always better. Please see the code below. I also include lda as a comparison. I'm using WinXP, R-2.9.0, and e1071_1.5-19. Many

I Want to have a copmparsion with NFS v3 that shows some statistics with both attribute intensive and data intensive clients. /P -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: vcard.vcf Type: text/x-vcard Size: 392 bytes Desc: Card for Patrik Linder Url : http://lists.samba.org/archive/samba/attachments/19990301/59f94bcf/vcard.vcf