search for: 0.0164

Thanks. In this case below, what is "x"? I tried rownames(out) which did not work. Sorry. Does this sound like homework to you? On 7/12/2024 5:09 PM, Uwe Ligges wrote: > > > On 12.07.2024 10:54, Steven Yen wrote: >> Below is part a regression printout. How can I use "grep" to identify >> rows headed by variables (first column) with a certain label. In

Below is part a regression printout. How can I use "grep" to identify rows headed by variables (first column) with a certain label. In this case, I like to find variables containing "somewhath", "veryh",?"somewhatm", "verym", "somewhatc", "veryc","somewhatl", "veryl". The result should be an index 6:13 or

hello, here are some problems with ks.test. Do you think these values are consistent? (2 e^{-1} means 0.2 ) data file name& sample size& D & pvalue A&10.000&0.4202&<2.2 e^{-16}\\ B&10.000&04294&<2.2 e^{-16}\\ C &10.000&0.4484&<2.2 e^{-16}\\ D&10.000&0.4569&<2.2 e^{-16}\\ E&50.000&0.4015&<2.2 e^{-16}\\

On 12.07.2024 10:54, Steven Yen wrote: > Below is part a regression printout. How can I use "grep" to identify > rows headed by variables (first column) with a certain label. In this > case, I like to find variables containing "somewhath", > "veryh",?"somewhatm", "verym", "somewhatc", "veryc","somewhatl",

Now I've found another way to make it work. All I need is to pick up the names in the column (x.1.age...). > v<-pr(goprobit.p); v Maximum-Likelihood Estimates weighted = FALSE iterations = 5 logLik = -14160.75 finalHessian = TRUE Covariance matrix is Robust Number of parameters = 66 Sample size = 17922 est se t p g sig x.1.age 0.0341 0.0138 2.4766 0.0133 -3.8835e-04 ** x.1.sleep

Could not get "which" to work, but my grep worked. Thanks. > which(grep("very|somewhat",names(goprobit.p$est))) Error in which(grep("very|somewhat", names(goprobit.p$est))) : argument to 'which' is not logical > grep("very|somewhat",names(goprobit.p$est)) [1] 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 On 7/12/2024

Hi list, I am using scale() to standardize a distribution? But why does it give me attributes attached to the data? I just want a standardized matrix, that is all. library(mvtnorm) > x <- rmvnorm(15, mean=rep(50, 10)) > x [,1] [,2] [,3] [,4] [,5] [,6] [,7] [,8] [,9] [1,] 51.17519 52.34341 49.63084 47.99234 51.63113 50.91391 49.36819 49.23901

Dear all, I work with R Version 2.0.0 on Machine hardware: sun4u OS version: 5.9 Processor type: sparc Hardware: SUNW,Sun-Blade-1000 and I have a very simple data frame (called OR) with the following variables: > sapply( OR, class) X ci FTyp "factor" "numeric" "factor" (In OR$ci there are some Inf-values. OR's

Hi, I am trying to construct a logistic regression model from my data (104 patients and 25 events). I build a full model consisting of five predictors with the use of penalization by rms package (lrm, pentrace etc) because of events per variable issue. Then, I tried to approximate the full model by step-down technique predicting L from all of the componet variables using ordinary least squares

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

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. > >>

Hi, I am having a hard time getting what the summary.lm-output for an ANOVA / ANCOVA means. Examples I find always seem to deal with simpler cases than what I meet in my data. My main problem is understanding the output when getting significant INTERACTION TERMS (what never occurs in examples :(). The following is the output after summary.lm(ancova) where "week" is continuous,

Hello, I currently get anova results out of the aov function (see below) I use the model.tables and I believe it gives me back the model parameters of the fit (betas), however I don't see the intercept (beta_0) and don't understand what the "rep" output means and there is no description in the documentation. Another question: is there a function that outputs the results in a

Dear all, I have a question with respect to counting process formulation of the coxph(survival) model. I have two groups of observations for which I have partitioned each observation into two distinct time intervals, namely, entry day till day 13, and day 13 till death or censorship day (of course the latter only for the observations that survived the first 13 day interval), and added a

Hello, I have used R in the past to conduct multiple comparisons on standard linear models, but am a bit confused as to how to go about doing it with a mixed effects model. I am conducting a bioindication study using carabid beetles in which I have four treatment types (forest harvest types with varying levels of canopy structure retention), and am using canopy closure percent as a covariate in

Yes. Any of the following worked. The pipe greater than (|>) is neat! Thanks. > v<-goprobit.p$est > names(v) |> grep("somewhat|very", x = _) ?[1]? 6? 7? 8? 9 10 11 12 13 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 > v |> names() |> grep("somewhat|very", x = _) ?[1]? 6? 7? 8? 9 10 11 12 13 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 >

Dear all, I'm using R 2.8.1 under Windows Vista on a dual core 2,4 GhZ with 4 GB of RAM. I'm trying to reproduce a result out of "Analysis of Financial Time Series" by Ruey Tsay. In R I'm using the fGarch library. After fitting a ar(3)-garch(1,1)-model > model<-garchFit(~arma(3,0)+garch(1,1), analyse) I'm saving the results via > result<-model

At 2013-09-09 13:07:07,"Tobias Grosser" <tobias at grosser.es> wrote: >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

> Hello, > > I have a question about a discrepancy between the > reported F statistics using anova() and add1() from > adding an additional term to form nested models. > > I found and old posting related to anova() and > drop1() regarding a glm with a dispersion parameter. > > The posting is very old (May 2000, R 1.1.0). > The old posting is located here. >

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