search for: 16.15

I apologize that I've asked a similar question before, but being new to R I don't think I did a very good job of formating the question. I've included a text file since the date set is somewhat large. What I have is a huge string of numbers in a text file. The numbers are all separated by comma's and the groups are separated by a semicolon. What I would like to do is read each

Hi R users, I have a question about fitting a cosine curve. I don't know how to set the approximate starting values. Besides, does the method work for sine curve as well? Thanks. Part of the dataset is in the following: y=c(16.82, 16.72, 16.63, 16.47, 16.84, 16.25, 16.15, 16.83, 17.41, 17.67, 17.62, 17.81, 17.91, 17.85, 17.70, 17.67, 17.45, 17.58, 16.99, 17.10) t=c(7, 37, 58, 79, 96,

Hello, The problem is that the factors are not orderd by the row number. If you want to check their order, use str(sortdata) and you'll see Santa-Rosa was attributed factor level 4 (in the output, first variable, the 3rd and 4th). Try the following. sortdata <- read.table(text=" county year x1 x2 x3 x4 x5 x6 x7 rank 141 Escambia 2002 6.50

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

Hi lily, You can get fairly good starting values just by eyeballing the curves: plot(y) lines(supsmu(1:20,y)) lines(0.6*cos((1:20)/3+0.6*pi)+17.2) Jim On Wed, Jun 21, 2017 at 9:17 AM, lily li <chocold12 at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi R users, > > I have a question about fitting a cosine curve. I don't know how to set the > approximate starting values. Besides, does the method

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

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

Attached are the Polyhedron 2005 benchmark results for current llvm/dragonegg svn on x86_64-apple-darwin11 built against Xcode 4.3.2 and FSF gcc 4.6.3. The benchmarks for -msse3 and -msse4 appear identical (at least for degg+optnz). This is fortunate since there seems to be a bug in -msse4 on 2.33 GHz (T7600) Intel Core 2 Duo Merom (http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=12434).

Hi Jack, > Attached are the Polyhedron 2005 benchmark results for current llvm/dragonegg svn > on x86_64-apple-darwin11 built against Xcode 4.3.2 and FSF gcc 4.6.3. thanks for the numbers. How does this compare to LLVM 3.0 - were there any regressions? Ciao, Duncan. The benchmarks > for -msse3 and -msse4 appear identical (at least for degg+optnz). This is fortunate > since

On Tue, Apr 03, 2012 at 09:26:38AM +0200, Duncan Sands wrote: > Hi Jack, > >> Attached are the Polyhedron 2005 benchmark results for current llvm/dragonegg svn >> on x86_64-apple-darwin11 built against Xcode 4.3.2 and FSF gcc 4.6.3. > > thanks for the numbers. How does this compare to LLVM 3.0 - were there any > regressions? The results from just before

[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

Using a more stable nonlinear modeling tool will also help, but key is to get the periodicity right. y=c(16.82, 16.72, 16.63, 16.47, 16.84, 16.25, 16.15, 16.83, 17.41, 17.67, 17.62, 17.81, 17.91, 17.85, 17.70, 17.67, 17.45, 17.58, 16.99, 17.10) t=c(7, 37, 58, 79, 96, 110, 114, 127, 146, 156, 161, 169, 176, 182, 190, 197, 209, 218, 232, 240) lidata <- data.frame(y=y, t=t) #I use the

On Tue, 3 Apr 2012 08:57:51 -0400 Jack Howarth <howarth at bromo.med.uc.edu> wrote: > On Tue, Apr 03, 2012 at 09:26:38AM +0200, Duncan Sands wrote: > > Hi Jack, > > > >> Attached are the Polyhedron 2005 benchmark results for current > >> llvm/dragonegg svn on x86_64-apple-darwin11 built against Xcode > >> 4.3.2 and FSF gcc 4.6.3. > > >

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

is there a way to use the actual index value for plotting zoo objects this is the way that the index is set up and a sample range of what I would like to plot 01/01/06 00:00:00 - 01/01/06 23:45:00 { library(zoo) # chron library(chron) fmt.chron <- function(x) { chron(sub(" .*", "", x), gsub(".* (.*)", "\\1:00", x)) }} x <- structure(c(15.57, 15.5,

On Thu, Oct 3, 2019 at 5:02 AM Nils Meyer <nils at nm.cx> wrote: > > Hi centos-virt, > > I hope I picked the correct mailing list. > > I was wondering whether there is a plan to get CentOS 8 and perhaps 7.7 > AMI for use with AWS. If you're in a rush, you can build an OS image with a local virtualization tool (such as VirtualBox or VMWare Player) and import it. Did

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.

If you know the period and want to fit phase and amplitude, this is equivalent to fitting a * sin + b * cos > >>> > I don't know how to set the approximate starting values. I'm not sure what you meant by that, but I suspect it's related to phase and amplitude. > >>> > Besides, does the method work for sine curve as well? sin is the same as cos with

I'm trying the different parameters, but don't know what the error is: Error in nlsModel(formula, mf, start, wts) : singular gradient matrix at initial parameter estimates Thanks for any suggestions. On Tue, Jun 20, 2017 at 7:37 PM, Don Cohen <don-r-help at isis.cs3-inc.com> wrote: > > If you know the period and want to fit phase and amplitude, this is > equivalent to

Hello list, how could this happen? The Server doesn't respond from time to time with a high load avarage. We found a suspicious smbd process: top - 13:43:07 up 1 day, 2:27, 5 users, load average: 32.49, 58.41, 37.95 Tasks: 1196 total, 5 running, 1190 sleeping, 0 stopped, 1 zombie Cpu0 : 14.7% us, 3.8% sy, 0.0% ni, 79.8% id, 1.3% wa, 0.0% hi, 0.3% si Cpu1 : 1.3% us, 84.6%