search for: bounding

Dear all, I am quite puzzled about the bound and absolute.t arguments to the l1ce function in the lasso2 package. (The l1ce function estimates the regression parameter b in a regression model y=Xb+e subject to the constraint that |b|<t for some value t). The doc says: bound numeric, either a single number or a vector: the constraint(s) that is/are put onto the L1 norm of the parameters.

Hi, First, when I try the example Prostate with bound 0.44 (as in the manual), I got a different result: > l1c.P <- l1ce(lpsa ~ ., Prostate, bound=0.44) > l1c.P .... Coefficients: (Intercept) lcavol lweight age lbph svi 1.0435803 0.4740831 0.1953156 0.0000000 0.0000000 0.3758199 lcp gleason pgg45 0.0000000 0.0000000

Dear LLVM developers: Here is my another proposal of LLVM. Any suggestion would be welcome! * ** * *** Integrate Baggy Bounds Checking into SAFECode*** * * *Abstract:** * Baggy Bounds Checking (BBC) is an efficient bounds checking technique that pad and align objects to powers of two and enable allocation bounds. It uses a contiguous array as bounds table to enable

Hi, I noticed a minor flaw in integrate() from package stats: Taking up arguments lower and upper from integrate(), if (lower == Inf) && (upper == Inf) or if (lower == -Inf) && (upper == -Inf) integrate() calculates the value for (lower==-Inf) && (upper==Inf). Rather, it should return 0. Quick fix: ### old code ### ### [snip] else {

On Sat, Aug 17, 2013 at 7:08 AM, Tom Browder <tom.browder at gmail.com> wrote: > On Sat, Aug 17, 2013 at 6:15 AM, Tom Browder <tom.browder at gmail.com>wrote: > >> On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 2:58 PM, Tom Browder <tom.browder at gmail.com>wrote: >> >>> On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 2:55 PM, Tom Browder <tom.browder at gmail.com>wrote: >>>

Hello. System info: OS: FC6 x86_64 video: Nvidia GF 7900 GT, driver version 97.55 compiz version: git config backend used: ccp I can reproduce this crash every time on my system. When blur plugin is active and I try to access any right-click menu, regular application menu or drop-down list, compiz crashes. Backtrace produced by crashhandler plugin shows crash in blur.c in function

Could someone help me with the following code snippet. The results are not what I expect: > Sheet1$Claims[1:10] [1] NA 1 2 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA > Sheet1[1:10,"SubmissionStatus"] [1] Declined Bound Bound Bound Bound Bound Declined Dead Declined [10] Not Taken Levels: Bound Dead Declined Not Taken > Sheet1$Claimsnum <- NA >

Fake flexible arrays (zero-length and one-element arrays) are deprecated, and should be replaced by flexible-array members. So, replace zero-length array with a flexible-array member in `struct PACKED_REGISTRY_TABLE`. Also annotate array `entries` with `__counted_by()` to prepare for the coming implementation by GCC and Clang of the `__counted_by` attribute. Flexible array members annotated with

Hi All, I have a really strange issue occuring where if I run "show dialplan" or "dialplan show" or "dialplan show parkedcalls", then asterisk dumps core. It only appears to happen with contexts that are created within res_features. I am able to display all my other dialplans, but, every time I try to just do a normal "dialplan show" asterisk core dumps

On 07/02/2015 05:43 PM, David Keaton wrote: > On 07/02/2015 05:30 PM, Philip Reames wrote: >> >> >> On 07/02/2015 04:44 PM, David Keaton wrote: >>> On 07/02/2015 03:17 AM, Kuperstein, Michael M wrote: >>>> You want to redefine ["won't break the program"], by specifying a new >>>> abstract machine, which is >>>> more

Hi, Some days ago I am interested in detecting undefined behaviors in C programs based on Clang. After several days’ investigation, I think checking bounds overflow bugs is more interesting, because bounds overflow is one of the most frequently encountered errors in C programs. For example, performing pointer arithmetic without checking bounds can cause bounds overflow. To increase the

John Regehr wrote: > Qiuping, > > Have you looked at what has already been done? I would expect that taking > previous work such as this: > > http://llvm.org/pubs/2006-05-24-SAFECode-BoundsCheck.html > > and integrating into current LLVM would be a better idea than starting > over. > This code is publicly available from the SAFECode project (see

Hi! Thanks for taking the time to read this. The code below creates a graph that takes 100 samples that are between 5% and 15% of the population (400). What I'd like to do, however, is add two other sections to the graph. It would look something like this: from 1-100 samples take 100 samples that are between 5% and 15% of the population (400). From 101-200 take 100 samples that are between

How to define bounds for a semi continous variable in lp_solve. Min 5x1 +9x2 +7.15x3 +0.1x4 subject to x1+x2+x3+x4=6.7 x1+x4 <= 6.5 And x3 can be 0 or greater than 3.6 hence x3 is a semi continous variable how to define bounds as well as semicontinous function because using set.semicont and set. bound simantaneously doesn't seem to work.Thanks in advance for the help -- View this

Sounds an good idea, is that means lowerinng down the SAFECode project from the higher level(clang)to lower level for an more general work on bound check? I aslo want to know is it possoble to detecting memory leak at the very low(llvm ir) level to detecting memory leaks? Or at llvm ir level to providing an stackfull hooks? It's very useful to have such an feature. The stack hooks can help us

Anyone seen this? It ocurred on a 'reload app_queue.so' command. Asterisk version is 1.2.9.1. Tried again, but it was not immediately reproducable. Doug. (gdb) bt #0 reload_queues () at app_queue.c:3339 #1 0xb778a7a8 in reload () at app_queue.c:4012 #2 0x0805bb44 in ast_module_reload (name=0x8137cc7 "app_queue.so") at loader.c:257 #3 0x08092b3f in handle_reload (fd=33,

yiqiuping1986 wrote: > Hi， John Criswell！ > You have said to me that SAFECode had not been maintained for several > years, Just to clarify, SAFECode *has* been and *is* maintained (primarily by me). The release_26 branch in the SVN repository works with LLVM 2.6, and mainline is working (with some regressions) with the upcoming LLVM 2.7. You can subscribe to the SVA Commits mailing list

Hi， John Criswell！ You have said to me that SAFECode had not been maintained for several years, now I have submitted my proposal for updating the SAFCode project to the new LLVM APIs. If you are still interested in the topic and willing to guid my project, I will be very happy. Now I'm waiting for you comments. Here is my proposal:

If this is posted elsewhere I cannot find it. I need to perform multiple integration where some of the variables are in the bounds of the other variables. I was trying to use R2Cuba function but cannot set the upper and lower bounds. My code so far is : int <- function(y){ u2 = y[1] z2 = y[2] u1 =y[3] z1 = y[4] ff <- u1*(z1-u1)*u2*(z2-u2)*exp(-0.027*(12-z2)) return(ff) }

Dear Duncan, Everything worked out with your help. Thanks. I'm now looking at bound checks that an Ada program has, so I can remove all possible. It seams that Ada already does some optimization to remove bound checks. Do you know how are they done, and where? I tested two codes (below) and the first code did not produce any bound check and the second produced two bound checks. -- -- Simple