search for: 0.8181

Dear all, this is probably more a statistics question than an R question but probably there is somebody who can help me nevertheless. I'm running a regression with four predictors (a, b, c, d) and all their interaction effects using lm. Based on theory I assume that a influences y positively. In my output (see below) I see, however, a negative regression coefficient for a. But several of the

I want to employ a parsimonious model to draw nomograms, as the full model is too complex to draw nomograms readily (several interactions of continuous variables). However, one interesting variable stays or leaves based on whether I choose "p value" or "AIC" options to fastbw(). My question boils down to this: Is there a theoretical reason to prefer one over another?

Background: OS: Linux Mandrake 10.1 release: R 2.0.0 editor: GNU Emacs 21.3.2 front-end: ESS 5.2.3 --------------------------------- Colleagues I am having some trouble extracting results from the function by, used to average variables in a data.frame first by one factor (depth) and then by a second factor (station). The real data.frame is quite large > dim(data.2001) [1] 32049 11 Here is a

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.

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