Displaying 9 results from an estimated 9 matches for "abadie".
Did you mean:
labadie
2012 May 24
2
[LLVMdev] -fbounds-checking vs {SAFECode,ASan}
On 5/24/12 5:41 AM, Duncan Sands wrote:
> Hi Kostya, I'm also curious to know where Nuno is going with this, and the
> details of his design. I'm worried he might be reinventing the wheel. I'm
> also worried that he may be inventing a square wheel :)
I believe Nuno's goal is to prevent run-time exploitation of software.
Nuno, please correct me if I'm wrong.
And
2012 May 25
0
[LLVMdev] -fbounds-checking vs {SAFECode,ASan}
On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 9:23 PM, John Criswell <criswell at illinois.edu>wrote:
> On 5/24/12 5:41 AM, Duncan Sands wrote:
> > Hi Kostya, I'm also curious to know where Nuno is going with this, and
> the
> > details of his design. I'm worried he might be reinventing the wheel.
> I'm
> > also worried that he may be inventing a square wheel :)
>
>
2007 Apr 28
1
The confidence level of p-value of ks.boot
Hello!
I need to compare 2 datasets whether they come from the same distribution. I use function ks.boot{Matching}. And what is the confidence level of the p-value, returned by ks.boot function?
The code is:
set=read.table("http://stella.sai.msu.ru:8080/~gala/data/testsets.csv",
header=T,sep=',')
set1=set[!is.na(set$set1),'set1']
2011 Jul 14
0
Var.calc in Matching
Hi,
I already have matched samples, which were matched using different software.
I need to calculate Abadie-Imbens standard errors, together with the average
treatment effect. I know that the Matching package enables me to calculate
these after a Matching procedure, but is there any way to do it on already
matched samples, which were not produce by the Match function?
Many thanks,
Louise.
--
View this...
2012 May 24
0
[LLVMdev] -fbounds-checking vs {SAFECode,ASan}
Hi Kostya, I'm also curious to know where Nuno is going with this, and the
details of his design. I'm worried he might be reinventing the wheel. I'm
also worried that he may be inventing a square wheel :)
> I noticed your commits related to -fbounds-checking and have some questions.
> The functionality of this new phase seems to (partially?) overlap with
> AddressSanitizer
2007 Nov 06
2
Kolmogorov-Smirnoff test
I am trying to determine whether two samples are identical or not. I'm
aware that somebody can use the Kolmogorov-Smirnoff test to compare
empirical distributions, but since my samples have ties I'm not sure if
I'm getting the right p-values for the comparison. Can the
Kolmogorov-Smirnoff test be adjusted for the case when ties exists and
are there any functions that already
2006 Apr 13
1
number of matches when using Match()
To anyone who uses the Match() function in the Matching library...
How do you go about deciding how many matches you will use? With my
data, my standard errors generally get smaller if I use more matches.
Speaking of standard errors, when correcting for heteroscedasticity,
how many matches do you use (this is the Var.cal option). It seems to
me that it might make sense to use the same number
2012 May 24
5
[LLVMdev] -fbounds-checking vs {SAFECode,ASan}
Hi Nuno,
I noticed your commits related to -fbounds-checking and have some
questions.
The functionality of this new phase seems to (partially?) overlap with
AddressSanitizer and SAFECode,
so I am curious how would you compare the two existing tools with the new
one.
Earlier you wrote:
>> So the main idea of this new flag is not for debugging, but rather for
production.
>> This means
2015 Mar 26
2
[LLVMdev] GSOC project on KCoFI
Hi
In my previous mail I mentioned the project on KCoFI( the control FLow
integrity methods for commodity hardware
http://sva.cs.illinois.edu/pubs/KCoFI-Oakland-2014.pdf ).
Will it be more helpful to the community if I do the improvements number #1
and #3 mentioned in my previous mail to the mailing list or if i try to
port it to arm architecture?
I have decided to go ahead with the improvements