search for: 0.0440

Displaying 7 results from an estimated 7 matches for "0.0440".

Did you mean: 0.0040
2007 Sep 18
0
[LLVMdev] 2.1 Pre-Release Available (testers needed)
Hi, LLVM 2.1-pre1 test results: Linux (SUSE) on x86 (P4) Release mode, but with assertions enabled LLVM srcdir == objdir # of expected passes 2250 # of expected failures 5 I ran the llvm-test suite on my desktop while I was also working on that PC, so don't put too much trust in the timing info. Especially during the "spiff" test the machine was swapping
2007 Dec 05
4
coxme frailty model standard errors?
Hello, I am running R 2.6.1 on windows xp I am trying to fit a cox proportional hazard model with a shared Gaussian frailty term using coxme My model is specified as: nofit1<-coxme(Surv(Age,cen1new)~ Sex+bo2+bo3,random=~1|isl,data=mydat) With x1-x3 being dummy variables, and isl being the community level variable with 4 levels. Does anyone know if there is a way to get the standard error
2010 Sep 08
4
coxph and ordinal variables?
Dear R-help members, Apologies - I am posting on behalf of a colleague, who is a little puzzled as STATA and R seem to be yielding different survival estimates for the same dataset when treating a variable as ordinal. Ordered() is used to represent an ordinal variable) I understand that R's coxph (by default) uses the Efron approximation, whereas STATA uses (by default) the Breslow. but we
2007 Sep 15
22
[LLVMdev] 2.1 Pre-Release Available (testers needed)
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
2009 Feb 07
11
[LLVMdev] 2.5 Pre-release1 available for testing
LLVMers, The 2.5 pre-release is available for testing: http://llvm.org/prereleases/2.5/ If you have time, I'd appreciate anyone who can help test the release. Please do the following: 1) Download/compile llvm source, and either compile llvm-gcc source or use llvm-gcc binary (please compile llvm-gcc with fortran if you can). 2) Run make check, send me the testrun.log 3) Run "make
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
2011 Dec 01
1
[LLVMdev] [llvm-testresults] bwilson__llvm-gcc_PROD__i386 nightly tester results
Are these 225 compile time regressions real? It sure looks bad! Ciao, Duncan. On 01/12/11 09:39, llvm-testresults at cs.uiuc.edu wrote: > > bwilson__llvm-gcc_PROD__i386 nightly tester results > > URL http://llvm.org/perf/db_default/simple/nts/380/ > Nickname bwilson__llvm-gcc_PROD__i386:4 > Name curlew.apple.com > > Run ID Order Start Time End Time > Current 380