search for: 54.53

Hello, I am running a model with four categories and want predicted probabilities in each category. Now for this example I wont give a counterfactual just the training data is fine but is there anyway to get a confidence interval around the predicted probabilities in each group? I have tried but it gives me probabilities and I have used interval="confidence", level=.095 and then interval

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%

Jim Klimov <jimklimov+nut at gmail.com> > > I believe some fixes were applied to the branch since your report (most visibly, about battery time settings), are you in position to test how it behaves now? :) Hi: I got another ups for testing. so I test the new commit for both APC SRT3000XL and SMT2200RM2U. the results below: 1. I get the new attribute "ups.test.result" for

Jim Klimov <jimklimov+nut at gmail.com> > > I believe some fixes were applied to the branch since your report (most visibly, about battery time settings), are you in position to test how it behaves now? :) Hi: I got another ups for testing. so I test the new commit for both APC SRT3000XL and SMT2200RM2U. the results below: 1. I get the new attribute "ups.test.result" for

I believe some fixes were applied to the branch since your report (most visibly, about battery time settings), are you in position to test how it behaves now? :) Thanks in advance, Jim Klimov On Wed, Nov 22, 2023 at 3:20?PM Jim Klimov <jimklimov+nut at gmail.com> wrote: > Great! Thanks for the info, and hope the driver author can address the > nits (forwarding now...) > > Jim

I believe some fixes were applied to the branch since your report (most visibly, about battery time settings), are you in position to test how it behaves now? :) Thanks in advance, Jim Klimov On Wed, Nov 22, 2023 at 3:20?PM Jim Klimov <jimklimov+nut at gmail.com> wrote: > Great! Thanks for the info, and hope the driver author can address the > nits (forwarding now...) > > Jim

Thanks again, Great to see confirmations of more and more things working! > I wonder what's the fastest method to test the function (previously I setup the ups and unplug the utility from the ups for testing). > is "upsrw driver.flag.allow_killpower=1" then "upscmd driver.killpower" the correct testing procedure? At least by intent of this new feature -- yes.

Thanks again, Great to see confirmations of more and more things working! > I wonder what's the fastest method to test the function (previously I setup the ups and unplug the utility from the ups for testing). > is "upsrw driver.flag.allow_killpower=1" then "upscmd driver.killpower" the correct testing procedure? At least by intent of this new feature -- yes.

Great! Thanks for the info, and hope the driver author can address the nits (forwarding now...) Jim On Wed, Nov 22, 2023, 15:05 d tbsky <tbskyd at gmail.com> wrote: > Jim Klimov via Nut-upsuser <nut-upsuser at alioth-lists.debian.net> > > > > Got an update for APC Modbus users: a new PR is waiting for real-life > testing for settable variables and instant commands

Great! Thanks for the info, and hope the driver author can address the nits (forwarding now...) Jim On Wed, Nov 22, 2023, 15:05 d tbsky <tbskyd at gmail.com> wrote: > Jim Klimov via Nut-upsuser <nut-upsuser at alioth-lists.debian.net> > > > > Got an update for APC Modbus users: a new PR is waiting for real-life > testing for settable variables and instant commands