search for: 0.0034

Displaying 20 results from an estimated 40 matches for "0.0034".

Did you mean: 0.003
2017 Dec 20
2
outlining (highlighting) pixels in ggplot2
Using the small reproducible example below, I'd like to know if one can somehow use the matrix "sig" (defined below) to add a black outline (with lwd=2) to all pixels with a corresponding value of 1 in the matrix 'sig'? So for example, in the ggplot2 plot below, the pixel located at [1,3] would be outlined by a black square since the value at sig[1,3] == 1. This is my first
2010 Mar 17
1
constrOptim - error: initial value not feasible
Hello at all, working with a dataset I try to optimize a non-linear function with constraint. test<-read.csv2("C:/Users/Herb/Desktop/Opti/NORM.csv") fkt<- function(x){ a<-c(0) s<-c(0) #Minimizing square error for(j in 1:107){ s<-(test[j,2] - (x[1] * test[j,3]) - (x[2] * test[j,4]) - (x[3]*test[j,5]) - (x[4]*test[j,6]) - (x[5]*test[j,7]))^2 a<- a+s} a<-as.double(a)
2017 Dec 20
0
outlining (highlighting) pixels in ggplot2
Hi Eric, you can use an annotate-layer, eg ind<-which(sig>0,arr.ind = T) ggplot(m1.melted, aes(x = Month, y = Site, fill = Concentration), autoscale = FALSE, zmin = -1 * zmax1, zmax = zmax1) + geom_tile() + coord_equal() + scale_fill_gradient2(low = "darkred", mid = "white", high = "darkblue",
2007 Sep 18
0
[LLVMdev] 2.1 Pre-Release Available (testers needed)
On Fri, Sep 14, 2007 at 11:42:18PM -0700, Tanya Lattner wrote: > The 2.1 pre-release (version 1) is available for testing: > http://llvm.org/prereleases/2.1/version1/ > > [...] > > 2) Download llvm-2.1, llvm-test-2.1, and the llvm-gcc4.0 source. > Compile everything. Run "make check" and the full llvm-test suite > (make TEST=nightly report). > > Send
2003 May 14
1
mcl models, percentages
I've put two packages for R on my home page at http://www.xs4all.nl/~jhckx/R/. The "pcnt" package is for multiway percentage tables. I've posted a first effort called "ctab" on this group and a request for enhancing "ftable" with percentages on the wishlist. The "mcl" package is for estimating multinomial logistic models using conditional logistic
2010 May 11
1
kernel density to smooth plots
Hi r-sers, I have a data of relative frequencies for the interval of 0-20, 20-40,...380-400.  I would like the two data on the same graph using the same x-axis label.  My question is how to get a smooth curve using kernel density code if it possible for this data.   > cbind(rel_obs,rel_gen)           rel_obs rel_gen  [1,] 0.000000000  0.0000  [2,] 0.092534175  0.0712  [3,] 0.105152471  0.1092
2008 Feb 03
0
[LLVMdev] 2.2 Prerelease available for testing
Target: FreeBSD 6.2-STABLE on i386 autoconf says: configure:2122: checking build system type configure:2140: result: i386-unknown-freebsd6.2 [...] configure:2721: gcc -v >&5 Using built-in specs. Configured with: FreeBSD/i386 system compiler Thread model: posix gcc version 3.4.6 [FreeBSD] 20060305 [...] objdir != srcdir, for both llvm and gcc. Release build. llvm-gcc 4.2 from source.
2006 Sep 07
1
Running wilcox.test function on two lists
Dear all, I'm a newbie to R and I would really apperciate any help with the following: I have two lists, l1 and l2: l1: $"A*0101" [1] 0.076 0.109 0.155 0.077 0.09 0 0 0.073 [9] 0.33 0.0034 0.0053 $"A*0247" [1] 0 0 0.5 .004 0 0 0 $"A*0248" [1] 0 0 0.3 0 0.06 .... l2: $"A*1101" [1] 0.17 0.24 0.097 0.075 0.067 $"A*0247" numeric(0)
2008 Jan 24
6
[LLVMdev] 2.2 Prerelease available for testing
LLVMers, The 2.2 prerelease is now available for testing: http://llvm.org/prereleases/2.2/ If anyone can help test this release, I ask that you do the following: 1) Build llvm and llvm-gcc (or use a binary). You may build release (default) or debug. You may pick llvm-gcc-4.0, llvm-gcc-4.2, or both. 2) Run 'make check'. 3) In llvm-test, run 'make TEST=nightly report'. 4) When
2008 Jan 28
0
[LLVMdev] 2.2 Prerelease available for testing
Target: FreeBSD 7.0-RC1 on amd64. autoconf says: configure:2122: checking build system type configure:2140: result: x86_64-unknown-freebsd7.0 [...] configure:2721: gcc -v >&5 Using built-in specs. Target: amd64-undermydesk-freebsd Configured with: FreeBSD/amd64 system compiler Thread model: posix gcc version 4.2.1 20070719 [FreeBSD] [...] objdir != srcdir, for both llvm and gcc. Release
2006 Mar 06
1
P-values from survreg (survival package) using a clusterterm
Hi all. Belove is the example from the cluster-help page wtih the output. I simply cannot figure out how to relate the estimate and robust Std. Err to the p-value. I am aware this a marginal model applying the sandwich estimator using (here I guess) an emperical (unstructered/exchangeable?) ICC. Shouldent it be, at least to some extend, comparable to the robust z-test, for rx :
2008 Mar 24
1
Great difference for piecewise linear function between R and SAS
Dear Rusers, I am now using R and SAS to fit the piecewise linear functions, and what surprised me is that they have a great differrent result. See below. #R code--Knots for distance are 16.13 and 24, respectively, and Knots for y are -0.4357 and -0.3202 m.glm<-glm(mark~x+poly(elevation,2)+bs(distance,degree=1,knots=c(16.13,24)) +bs(y,degree=1,knots=c(-0.4357,-0.3202
2001 Aug 28
2
using by to plot
Hello, I would like to use by to create a series of plots, but I'm not sure how to design the function. Here's what I've got: 1. A data frame of observations of measured value 2 measured vlaues and a pch code. V1 V2 pchCode .0045 123 1 .0034 145 2 .0045 123 1 .0046 167 3 ... So what I want to do is create a single scatterplot of the multiple conditions (specified by
2011 Apr 20
2
survexp with weights
Hello, I probably have a syntax error in trying to generate an expected survival curve from a weighted cox model, but I can't see it. I used the help sample code to generate a weighted model, with the addition of a "weights=albumin" argument (I only chose albumin because it had no missing values, not because of any real relevance). Below are my code with the resulting error
2005 Jul 01
0
[LLVMdev] execution time of bytecode and native
On Thu, 30 Jun 2005, Tanu Sharma wrote: > I am compiling SPEC 2000 benchmarks with llvm .Got stuck with > calculating "execution time" of all the .bc and native files. > > The log for nightly test itself gives execution times but I am passing > the bytecode files to my pass which gives another bytecode file.I have > to calculate execution time of such bytecode and
2013 Sep 09
0
[LLVMdev] [Polly] Compile-time and Execution-time analysis for the SCEV canonicalization
On 09/09/2013 05:18 AM, Star Tan wrote: > > At 2013-09-09 05:52:35,"Tobias Grosser" <tobias at grosser.es> wrote: > >> On 09/08/2013 08:03 PM, Star Tan wrote: >> Also, I wonder if your runs include the dependence analysis. If this is >> the case, the numbers are very good. Otherwise, 30% overhead seems still >> to be a little bit much. > I think
2010 Jun 18
1
12th Root of a Square (Transition) Matrix
Dear R-tisans, I am trying to calculate the 12th root of a transition (square) matrix, but can't seem to obtain an accurate result. I realize that this post is laced with intimations of quantitative finance, but the question is both R-related and broadly mathematical. That said, I'm happy to post this to R-SIG-Finance if I've erred in posting this to the general list. I've
2005 Jul 01
1
[LLVMdev] execution time of bytecode and native
Hello , I am compiling SPEC 2000 benchmarks with llvm .Got stuck with calculating "execution time" of all the .bc and native files. The log for nightly test itself gives execution times but I am passing the bytecode files to my pass which gives another bytecode file.I have to calculate execution time of such bytecode and native files as well.If i simply do this: time lli
2005 Jul 21
1
[LLVMdev] execution time of bytecode and native
Hello All, Thanks for the reply.I can generate the reports by compiling Spec through llvm, but that couldn't resolve my problem. I m trying to determine execution time for the bytecode and native files , which are obtained as a result of running my pass over the original bytecode .I am running these experiments on spec benchmark. In SPEC we have command line tools such as runspec where
2013 Sep 09
4
[LLVMdev] [Polly] Compile-time and Execution-time analysis for the SCEV canonicalization
At 2013-09-09 05:52:35,"Tobias Grosser" <tobias at grosser.es> wrote: >On 09/08/2013 08:03 PM, Star Tan wrote: >> Hello all, >> >> >> I have done some basic experiments about Polly canonicalization passes and I found the SCEV canonicalization has significant impact on both compile-time and execution-time performance. > >Interesting. > >>