Displaying 18 results from an estimated 18 matches for "0.0343".
Did you mean:
0.033
2007 Feb 27
2
str() to extract components
Hi,
I have been dabbling with str() to extract values from outputs such as
lmer etc and have found it very helpful sometimes.
but only seem to manage to extract the values when the output is one
simple table, any more complicated and I'm stumped :-(
take this example of the extracted coeficients from a lmer analysis...
using str(coef(lmer(resp3~b$age+b$size+b$pcfat+(1|sex), data=b)))
2010 Apr 08
3
[LLVMdev] darwin llvm-gfortran Polyhedron 2005 results
Building the current release 2.7 branch on x86_64-apple-darwin10
with r81455 reverted, I get the following Polyhedron 2005 benchmark
results (with no test failures)...
================================================================================
Date & Time : 7 Apr 2010 22:24:16
Test Name : llvm_gfortran_lin_p4
Compile Command : llvm-gfortran -ffast-math -funroll-loops -msse3
2010 Apr 08
0
[LLVMdev] darwin llvm-gfortran Polyhedron 2005 results
On Apr 7, 2010, at 8:41 PM, Jack Howarth wrote:
> Building the current release 2.7 branch on x86_64-apple-darwin10
> with r81455 reverted, I get the following Polyhedron 2005 benchmark
> results (with no test failures)...
Very nice! A 14% speedup on a benchmark we don't tune for isn't bad. I imagine that there are several easy wins you could get on it if you were interested
2010 Sep 20
1
[LLVMdev] Polyhedron 2005 regressions
Comparing the Polyhedron 2005 benchmark results for gfortran from
llvm-gcc-4.2 of April 7th, 2010 and September 18th, 2010 (from
the rc2 2.8 release branch), we seem to be regressing in performance
for this release....
================================================================================
Date & Time : 7 Apr 2010 22:24:16
Test Name : llvm_gfortran_lin_p4
Compile Command :
2010 Apr 08
3
[LLVMdev] darwin llvm-gfortran Polyhedron 2005 results
On Wed, Apr 07, 2010 at 09:54:36PM -0700, Chris Lattner wrote:
>
> On Apr 7, 2010, at 8:41 PM, Jack Howarth wrote:
>
> > Building the current release 2.7 branch on x86_64-apple-darwin10
> > with r81455 reverted, I get the following Polyhedron 2005 benchmark
> > results (with no test failures)...
>
> Very nice! A 14% speedup on a benchmark we don't tune for
2002 Jun 19
2
split plot design with missing plots
Windows 2000 . 5.00.2195 with Service Pack 1.
R 1.5.1
Output from my split-split plot aov "alerted" me that I have done something
wrong. I designed an experiment with all combinations of all levels of each
treatment, but lost a little data (3 out of 192 plots). With the following
data, I run the following model:
> collim[c(1:6,187:192),c(1,3:6,9)]
plot Litter Fert
2010 Apr 08
0
[LLVMdev] darwin llvm-gfortran Polyhedron 2005 results
[CCing Dale since this was his change, not mine]
The change in 81455 fixes a compiler crash. It doesn't happen very often, but I can't imagine we would want to back that out. Fixing it would be a more reasonable solution. From a quick look at it, the problem is that gcc/config/darwin-c.c is registering va_opt for GC. When you build for Fortran, darwin-c.o is not linked so the GC gets
2010 Apr 08
1
[LLVMdev] darwin llvm-gfortran Polyhedron 2005 results
On Thu, Apr 08, 2010 at 08:45:48AM -0700, Bob Wilson wrote:
> [CCing Dale since this was his change, not mine]
>
> The change in 81455 fixes a compiler crash. It doesn't happen very often, but I can't imagine we would want to back that out. Fixing it would be a more reasonable solution. From a quick look at it, the problem is that gcc/config/darwin-c.c is registering va_opt
2009 Feb 12
0
Sign differences amoung QR solutions.
I was noticing mainly sign differences amoung the solutions to QR decomposition. For example R:
> x <- matrix(c(12,-51,4,6,167,-68,-4,24,-41),nrow=3,byrow=T)
> x
[,1] [,2] [,3]
[1,] 12 -51 4
[2,] 6 167 -68
[3,] -4 24 -41
> r <- qr(x)
> r$qr
[,1] [,2] [,3]
[1,] -14.0000000 -21.0000000 14
[2,] 0.4285714 -175.0000000 70
[3,]
2010 Apr 08
2
[LLVMdev] darwin llvm-gfortran Polyhedron 2005 results
On Apr 8, 2010, at 8:45 AMPDT, Bob Wilson wrote:
> [CCing Dale since this was his change, not mine]
>
> The change in 81455 fixes a compiler crash. It doesn't happen very often, but I can't imagine we would want to back that out. Fixing it would be a more reasonable solution. From a quick look at it, the problem is that gcc/config/darwin-c.c is registering va_opt for GC.
2011 Feb 21
0
[LLVMdev] llvm-gcc4.2 bootstrap broken?
On Feb 19, 2011, at 11:25 AM, Jack Howarth wrote:
> Is anyone able to bootstrap llvm-gcc42 svn on x86_64-apple-darwin10? Currently it is
> failing here with...
It was broken. I think I've fixed it in reverting 125960.
-eric
2006 Jul 15
0
How to Interpret Results of Regression in R
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Howdy, Gurus
I am appying R package for regression analysis as followings.
A dependent variable is jhnet that means ratio of dividing internal trip
with all trips in a traffic zone. There are many indepentent variables
including factor or dummy varibles such as parkfee, ohouse, Devt2,
corridor1.
2011 Feb 22
1
[LLVMdev] llvm-gcc4.2 bootstrap broken?
On Mon, Feb 21, 2011 at 03:58:19PM -0800, Eric Christopher wrote:
>
> On Feb 19, 2011, at 11:25 AM, Jack Howarth wrote:
>
> > Is anyone able to bootstrap llvm-gcc42 svn on x86_64-apple-darwin10? Currently it is
> > failing here with...
>
> It was broken. I think I've fixed it in reverting 125960.
>
> -eric
Eric,
The llvm-gcc42 bootstrap is fixed in
2006 Mar 24
1
who can tell me the reason why it is different on calculating Moran's I using ARCGIS, Geoda and R?
The attachment is my dataset:
1.ccc.shp (the original data)
2.ccc.gwt, which is computed by Geoda;
Introduction to the variables in my data:
ID: key variable;
N_LATITUDE: latitude measured by GPS;
E_LONGITUD: longitude measured by GPS;
LIVES: attribute data
I get the different result of Moran's between ARCGIS and Geoda, R, why?
ARCGIS:spatial statistics tools:spatial
2011 Feb 19
2
[LLVMdev] llvm-gcc4.2 bootstrap broken?
Is anyone able to bootstrap llvm-gcc42 svn on x86_64-apple-darwin10? Currently it is
failing here with...
/sw/src/fink.build/llvm-gcc42-2.9-0/llvm_gcc42_objdir/./prev-gcc/xgcc -B/sw/src/fink.build/llvm-gcc42-2.9-0/llvm_gcc42_objdir/./prev-gcc/ -B/sw/lib/llvm-gcc-4.2/x86_64-apple-darwin10/bin/ -c -g -O2 -mdynamic-no-pic -DIN_GCC -W -Wall -Wwrite-strings -Wstrict-prototypes -Wmissing-prototypes
2012 Nov 23
2
[LLVMdev] [cfe-dev] costing optimisations
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.
>>
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.
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