search for: 0.0321

Dear Dr.Goslee and anyone may intrested in matrix manipulate, I am using your ecodist to do mantel and partial mantel test, I have locality data and shape variation data, and the two distance matrixs are given as belowings. When I run the analysis, it is always report that the matrix is not square, but I didn't know what's wrong with my data. Would you please help me on this. I am quite

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}\\

Hi all, I've been trying to learn more about memory profiling in R and I've been trying memory profiling out on read.table. I'm getting a bit of a strange result, and I hope that someone might be able to explain why. After running Rprof("read-table.prof", memory.profiling = TRUE, line.profiling = TRUE, gc.profiling = TRUE, interval = interval) diamonds <-

Hello Everybody, I have a problem with the output of lm. In fact, when I compare the R output and the Splus output, the results appears to be different : I have a dataframe with 5 factors , 16 rows and a response. First, I tried to fit this response to a linear model : lm(rep~(A+B+C+D+E),data). The results beetween SPlus and R are different. In a second time, I tried a new fit :

Hello, Can the x and y axis limits be specified in a density plot with the mixtools package for a finite mixture model? Uncommenting the xlim2/ ylim2 lines in the plot command below generates 'not a graphical parameter' warnings (and does not change the axis settings), and uncommenting the xlim/ylim lines generates a 'formal argument "ylim" matched by multiple actual

Hi all, I'm trying to perform a nested ANOVA, in which "Rewetted" is the main factor and "Position" is a fixed factor nested in "Location". I'm interested in the effect of "Rewetting" and "Position" on the dependent variable (in this case called N), and also in the interaction between these factors. I tried finding this using this script:

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

I am looking for help to analyze an unbalanced AB/BA cross-over design by requesting the type III SS ! # Example 3.1 from S. Senn (1993). Cross-over Trials in Clinical Research outcome<-c(310,310,370,410,250,380,330,270,260,300,390,210,350,365,370,310,380,290,260,90,385,400,410,320,340,220) subject<-as.factor(c(1,4,6,7,10,11,14,1,4,6,7,10,11,14,2,3,5,9,12,13,2,3,5,9,12,13))

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

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