search for: 0.0101

Hi, I was hoping to clarify the exact behavior associated with this incantation: validate(fit.ols, method='cross', B=50) Output: index.orig training test optimism index.corrected n R-square 0.5612 0.5613 0.5171 0.0442 0.5170 50 MSE 1.3090 1.3086 1.3547 -0.0462 1.3552 50 Intercept 0.0000 0.0000 -0.0040 0.0040

I have a dataframe called x2. It seems to have a date column but I can't access it or give it a name or convert it to a date. How do I refer to that first column and make it a date ? When I try x2[1,] I get the second column. head(x2) FAIRX SP500 delta 2000-08-31 0.010101096 0.007426964 0.002674132 2000-09-29 0.096679730 -0.054966292 0.151646023 2000-10-31

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

With the case-insensitive file system patch from http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=9656#c15 applied to dragonegg 2.9, the following Polyhedron 2005 benchmarks are seen on x86_64-apple-darwin10 under gcc 4.5.3svn using the dragonegg plugin... ================================================================================ Date & Time : 8 Apr 2011 19:52:56 Test Name :

Dear all I have the following data (a shortened extract shown; some replictates of time deleted) to which I fitted the linear model given below: time group mass 11 control 0.019 11 control 0.014 14 control 0.0306 14 control 0.0289 14 control 0.0236 17 control 0.0469 17 control 0.0709 11 five 0.0077 11 five

Did something change with exception handling recently? A bunch of lit bots are showing slower compile times for many tests. Ciao, Duncan. On 20/06/12 07:53, llvm-testresults at cs.uiuc.edu wrote: > > lab-mini-03__O0-g__clang_DEV__x86_64 test results > <http://llvm.org/perf/db_default/v4/nts/1283?compare_to=1278&baseline=999> > > Run Order Start Time Duration >

Nothing that I'm aware of has changed with EH. Is it possible to bisect the problem? -bw On Jun 20, 2012, at 12:38 AM, Duncan Sands <baldrick at free.fr> wrote: > Did something change with exception handling recently? A bunch of lit bots are > showing slower compile times for many tests. > > Ciao, Duncan. > > On 20/06/12 07:53, llvm-testresults at cs.uiuc.edu

Hi Bill, > Nothing that I'm aware of has changed with EH. Is it possible to bisect the problem? I don't see any relevant LLVM changes, so I guess clang C++ compilation slowed down due to some clang changes. I'm not going to investigate this. Ciao, Duncan. > > -bw > > On Jun 20, 2012, at 12:38 AM, Duncan Sands <baldrick at free.fr> wrote: > >> Did

Dear Users, In case of ridge logistic regression, i want to calculate the optimum penalty using aic and bic criteria. Here is the sample code: fit <- lrm(RES ~CAT01+NUM01+NUM02+CAT02+CAT03+CAT04+NUM03+CAT05+CAT06+NUM04+ CAT07+CAT08+NUM05+NUM06, data = train.data, x = TRUE, y = TRUE) pentrace(fit, penalty = list(seq(.001, 5, by=.1))) output: Best penalty: penalty df 1.001

Hi Jack, thanks for the numbers. Any chance of analysing why gcc does better on those where it does much better than dragonegg? Ciao, Duncan. > With the case-insensitive file system patch from http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=9656#c15 > applied to dragonegg 2.9, the following Polyhedron 2005 benchmarks are seen on x86_64-apple-darwin10 > under gcc 4.5.3svn using the dragonegg

First of all, I have GAMs noxd<-gam(newNOX~pressure+maxtemp+s(avetemp,bs="cr")+s(mintemp,bs="cr")+s(RH,bs="cr")+s(solar,bs="cr")+s(windspeed,bs="cr")+s(transport,bs="cr"),family=gaussian (link=log),groupD,methods=REML) Then I type " summary(noxd)". and show Family: gaussian Link function: log Formula: newNO2 ~ pressure

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

On Jul 5, 2012, at 1:33 AM, Duncan Sands wrote: > Hi Bill, > >> Nothing that I'm aware of has changed with EH. Is it possible to bisect the problem? > > I don't see any relevant LLVM changes, so I guess clang C++ compilation slowed > down due to some clang changes. I'm not going to investigate this. > Crumbs. John, Do you know of anything that went into

> Mehdi Amini <mehdi.amini at apple.com> 於 2016年11月30日 上午5:14 寫道： > >> >> On Nov 29, 2016, at 4:02 AM, Bekket McClane via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>> wrote: >> >> Hi, >> Though there exists lots of researches on parallelizing or scheduling optimization passes, If you open up the time matrices of

Hi Andrew, > No. Duncan suggested that he could hitch a ride with us through France. The problem is, we're not driving to Spain at all and there doesn't appear to be any place to transfer. > > The point is, you're not going to be able to leverage most of a CFG-based optimizing compiler if don't use the CFG to express control flow. when Chris first came up with his

On Jun 14, 2011, at 1:07 AM, Duncan Sands wrote: > Hi Andrew, > >> No. Duncan suggested that he could hitch a ride with us through France. The problem is, we're not driving to Spain at all and there doesn't appear to be any place to transfer. >> >> The point is, you're not going to be able to leverage most of a CFG-based optimizing compiler if don't use

Dear list members, the following hlm was constructed: hlm <- groupedData(laut ~ design | grpzugeh, data = imp.not.I) the grouped data object is located at and can be downloaded: www.anicca-vijja.de/lg/hlm_example.Rdata The following works: library(nlme) summary( fitlme <- lme(hlm) ) with output: ... AIC BIC logLik 425.3768 465.6087 -197.6884 Random effects:

I've searched the Web with Google and do not find what might cause this particular error from an invocation of cenboxplot: cenboxplot(cu.t$quant, cu.t$ceneq1, cu.t$era, range=1.5, main='Total Recoverable Copper', ylab='Concentration (mg/L)', xlab='Time Period') Error in if (n > 0) (1L:n - a)/(n + 1 - 2 * a) else numeric() : argument is of length zero I do

I'm a little further along now. I've started to put together a simple driver for Elsa and LLVM that I'm calling "ellsif" (cute name, I think it works). The file being compiled is a "printf" function. Here are timing results for optimized and unoptimized runs: [~/elsa/ellsif] dev% ./ellsif -v test/ofmt.i -time-actions Adding test/ofmt.i as a preprocessed C file

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