search for: 0.0198

I've been playing around with various table tools, trying to construct a fairly simple cross-tab. It shouldn't be hard, but for some reason it turning out to be (for me). If I want to see how many men and how many women agree with a agree/disagree question (coded 1,0), I can do this: >attach(mydata) >mytable <- table(male, q1.bin) # gender and a binary response variable

Hi All I am trying to translate a proc mixed into a lme() syntax. It seems that I was able to do it for part of the model, but a few things are still different. It is a 2-level bivariate model (some call it a pseudo-3-level model). PROC MIXED DATA=psdata.bivar COVTEST METHOD = ml; CLASS cluster_ID individual_id variable_id ; MODEL y = Dp Dq / SOLUTION NOINT; RANDOM Dp Dq / SUBJECT = cluster_ID

Dear R-list, I have a data set from 20 pigs, each of which is tested at crossed 9 doses (logdose -4:4) and 3 skin treatment substances when exposed to a standard polluted environment. So there are 27 patches on each pig. The response is irritation=yes/no. I want to determine "equally effective 50% doses" (similar to old LD50), and to test the treatments against each other. I am looking

I've run an ancova, edadysexo is a factor with 3 levels,and log(lcc) is the covariate (continous variable) I get this results > ancova<-aov(log(peso)~edadysexo*log(lcc)) > summary(ancova) Df Sum Sq Mean Sq F value Pr(>F) edadysexo 2 31.859 15.9294 803.9843 <2e-16 *** log(lcc) 1 11.389 11.3887 574.8081 <2e-16 ***

Hi Experts, I am new to R, and was wondering how to do 3D linear regression in R. In other words, I need to Fit a 3-Dimensional Line to Data Points (input). I googled before posting this, and found that it is possible in Matlab and other commercial packages. For example, see the Matlab link:

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

Dear all, I get an error using betrag on this data set :http://dl.dropbox.com/u/1866110/dump.csv. I run it like this regression f2.1=betareg(Y~X1+X2,data=dump) summary(f2.1) I get : Call: betareg(formula = Y ~ X1 + X2, data = dump) Standardized weighted residuals 2: Error in quantile.default(x$residuals) : missing values and NaN's not allowed if 'na.rm' is FALSE In addition:

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:

Dear all, I have tried to calculate a GLMM fit with lmer (lme4) and glmmPQL (MASS), I also used glm for comparison. I am getting very different results from different functions, and I suspect that the problem is with our dataset rather than the functions, but I would appreciate help in deciding whether my suspicions are right. If indeed we are attempting the wrong type of analysis, some

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.

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

Hi, I am trying to make a multi-class classification tree by using rpart. I used MASS package'd data: fgl to test and it works well. However, when I used my small-sampled data as below, the program seems to take forever. I am not sure if it is due to slowness or there is something wrong with my codes or data manipulation. Please be advised ! The data is described as the output from str()

On 23.11.2012, at 15:12, john skaller <skaller at users.sourceforge.net> wrote: > > On 23/11/2012, at 5:46 PM, Sean Silva wrote: > >> Adding LLVMdev, since this is intimately related to the optimization passes. >> >>> I think this is roughly because some function level optimisations are >>> worse than O(N) in the number of instructions. >>

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

LLVMers, The 2.1 pre-release (version 1) is available for testing: http://llvm.org/prereleases/2.1/version1/ I'm looking for members of the LLVM community to test the 2.1 release. There are 2 ways you can help: 1) Download llvm-2.1, llvm-test-2.1, and the appropriate llvm-gcc4.0 binary. Run "make check" and the full llvm-test suite (make TEST=nightly report). 2) Download