search for: expr10

...b)-(a-1)*(log(x)-log(b))- (x^a)/(b^a)) > fllwfuncH <-deriv(fllwform,c("a","b"),function(a,b,x){}) > fllwfuncH function (a, b, x) { .expr2 <- log(b) .expr4 <- a - 1 .expr5 <- log(x) .expr6 <- .expr5 - .expr2 .expr9 <- x^a .expr10 <- b^a .expr19 <- .expr10^2 .expr23 <- 1/b .value <- log(a) - .expr2 - .expr4 * .expr6 - .expr9/.expr10 .grad <- array(0, c(length(.value), 2), list(NULL, c("a", "b"))) .grad[, "a"] <- 1/a - .expr6 - (.expr9 * .expr5...

...f my expression? (I suspect it's doing derivatives numerically) Can I specify the partials in advance? I noticed the 'deriv' function, but am baffled by its output: > deriv(~ a0 / (Q*sqrt((1-(x/f0)^2)^2 + ((x/f0) * 1/Q)^2)),"a0") expression({ .expr1 <- x/f0 .expr10 <- Q * sqrt(1 - .expr1^2^2 + .expr1 * 1/Q^2) .value <- a0/.expr10 .grad <- array(0, c(length(.value), 1), list(NULL, c("a0"))) .grad[, "a0"] <- 1/.expr10 attr(.value, "gradient") <- .grad .value }) I think .expr10 should look more l...

...ession evaluated. This has the visibility of the last evaluation. But both x AND y are created, but the "return value" is y. How can this be advantageous for solving practical problems? Specifically, consider the following code: F <- function(X) { expr; expr2; { expr5; expr7}; expr8;expr10} Both expr5 and expr7 are created, and are accessible by the code outside of the nested braces right? But the "return value" of the nested braces is expr7. So doesn't this mean that only expr7 should be accessible? Please help me entangle this (of course the return value of F is expr...

I would like to be able, inside a function, to create a new function, and use it as part of a formula as an argument to, say, gnls or nlme. for example: MyTop <- function(data=dta) { Cexp <- function(dose,A,B,m){...} Model <- as.formula(paste("y","~ Cexp(",paste(formals(Cexp),collapse =", "),")")) MyCall <-

...he visibility of the last evaluation. > > But both x AND y are created, but the "return value" is y. How can this be > advantageous for solving practical problems? Specifically, consider the > following code: > > F <- function(X) { expr; expr2; { expr5; expr7}; expr8;expr10} > > Both expr5 and expr7 are created, and are accessible by the code outside > of the nested braces right? But the "return value" of the nested braces is > expr7. So doesn't this mean that only expr7 should be accessible? Please > help me entangle this (of course the r...

...he visibility of the last evaluation. > > But both x AND y are created, but the "return value" is y. How can this be > advantageous for solving practical problems? Specifically, consider the > following code: > > F <- function(X) { expr; expr2; { expr5; expr7}; expr8;expr10} > > Both expr5 and expr7 are created, and are accessible by the code outside > of the nested braces right? But the "return value" of the nested braces is > expr7. So doesn't this mean that only expr7 should be accessible? Please > help me entangle this (of course the r...

...This has the visibility of the last evaluation. > > But both x AND y are created, but the "return value" is y. How can this be advantageous for solving practical problems? Specifically, consider the following code: > > F <- function(X) { expr; expr2; { expr5; expr7}; expr8;expr10} > > Both expr5 and expr7 are created, and are accessible by the code outside of the nested braces right? But the "return value" of the nested braces is expr7. So doesn't this mean that only expr7 should be accessible? Please help me entangle this (of course the return value of...

...is has the visibility of the last evaluation. > > But both x AND y are created, but the "return value" is y. How can this be advantageous for solving practical problems? Specifically, consider the following code: > > F <- function(X) { expr; expr2; { expr5; expr7}; expr8;expr10} > > Both expr5 and expr7 are created, and are accessible by the code outside of the nested braces right? But the "return value" of the nested braces is expr7. So doesn't this mean that only expr7 should be accessible? Please help me entangle this (of course the return value of...

...t evaluation. >> >> But both x AND y are created, but the "return value" is y. How can this >> be advantageous for solving practical problems? Specifically, consider the >> following code: >> >> F <- function(X) { expr; expr2; { expr5; expr7}; expr8;expr10} >> >> Both expr5 and expr7 are created, and are accessible by the code outside >> of the nested braces right? But the "return value" of the nested braces is >> expr7. So doesn't this mean that only expr7 should be accessible? Please >> help me entangle t...

...ibility of the last evaluation. >> >> But both x AND y are created, but the "return value" is y. How can this be advantageous for solving practical problems? Specifically, consider the following code: >> >> F <- function(X) {? expr; expr2; { expr5; expr7}; expr8;expr10} >> >> Both expr5 and expr7 are created, and are accessible by the code outside of the nested braces right? But the "return value" of the nested braces is expr7. So doesn't this mean that only expr7 should be accessible? Please help me entangle this (of course the return v...

...t; >>> But both x AND y are created, but the "return value" is y. How can this >>> be advantageous for solving practical problems? Specifically, consider the >>> following code: >>> >>> F <- function(X) { expr; expr2; { expr5; expr7}; expr8;expr10} >>> >>> Both expr5 and expr7 are created, and are accessible by the code outside >>> of the nested braces right? But the "return value" of the nested braces is >>> expr7. So doesn't this mean that only expr7 should be accessible? Please >>&gt...

...last evaluation. > > > > But both x AND y are created, but the "return value" is y. How can this > be advantageous for solving practical problems? Specifically, consider the > following code: > > > > F <- function(X) { expr; expr2; { expr5; expr7}; expr8;expr10} > > > > Both expr5 and expr7 are created, and are accessible by the code outside > of the nested braces right? But the "return value" of the nested braces is > expr7. So doesn't this mean that only expr7 should be accessible? Please > help me entangle this (of co...

.... > >> > >> But both x AND y are created, but the "return value" is y. How can this > be advantageous for solving practical problems? Specifically, consider the > following code: > >> > >> F <- function(X) { expr; expr2; { expr5; expr7}; expr8;expr10} > >> > >> Both expr5 and expr7 are created, and are accessible by the code > outside of the nested braces right? But the "return value" of the nested > braces is expr7. So doesn't this mean that only expr7 should be accessible? > Please help me entangle thi...

...This has the visibility of the last evaluation. > > But both x AND y are created, but the "return value" is y. How can this be advantageous for solving practical problems? Specifically, consider the following code: > > F <- function(X) { expr; expr2; { expr5; expr7}; expr8;expr10} > > Both expr5 and expr7 are created, and are accessible by the code > outside of the nested braces right? But the "return value" of the > nested braces is expr7. So doesn't this mean that only expr7 should be > accessible? Please help me entangle this (of course th...

.... > >> > >> But both x AND y are created, but the "return value" is y. How can this > be advantageous for solving practical problems? Specifically, consider the > following code: > >> > >> F <- function(X) { expr; expr2; { expr5; expr7}; expr8;expr10} > >> > >> Both expr5 and expr7 are created, and are accessible by the code > outside of the nested braces right? But the "return value" of the nested > braces is expr7. So doesn't this mean that only expr7 should be accessible? > Please help me entangle thi...

...This has the visibility of the last evaluation. > > But both x AND y are created, but the "return value" is y. How can this be advantageous for solving practical problems? Specifically, consider the following code: > > F <- function(X) { expr; expr2; { expr5; expr7}; expr8;expr10} > > Both expr5 and expr7 are created, and are accessible by the code > outside of the nested braces right? But the "return value" of the > nested braces is expr7. So doesn't this mean that only expr7 should be > accessible? Please help me entangle this (of course the r...

...This has the visibility of the last evaluation. > > But both x AND y are created, but the "return value" is y. How can this be advantageous for solving practical problems? Specifically, consider the following code: > > F <- function(X) { expr; expr2; { expr5; expr7}; expr8;expr10} > > Both expr5 and expr7 are created, and are accessible by the code > outside of the nested braces right? But the "return value" of the > nested braces is expr7. So doesn't this mean that only expr7 should be > accessible? Please help me entangle this (of course th...

.... > >> > >> But both x AND y are created, but the "return value" is y. How can this > be advantageous for solving practical problems? Specifically, consider the > following code: > >> > >> F <- function(X) { expr; expr2; { expr5; expr7}; expr8;expr10} > >> > >> Both expr5 and expr7 are created, and are accessible by the code > outside of the nested braces right? But the "return value" of the nested > braces is expr7. So doesn't this mean that only expr7 should be accessible? > Please help me entangle thi...

...then use the fixed effect values from nlsList (i.e. the average value of each parameter over the groups) to do a nonlinear mixed model (nlme) using the fixed effects estimates from nlsList, I fail to converge after 50 iterations and get two types of warning: (1): "NaNs produced in: sqrt(.expr10)" - this is because the parameter values drift into regions in which the sqrt in the function is undefined. (2) "Singular precision matrix in level -1, block 1". - I do not know what this warning means. I have tried many different changes in the starting values and none work....

.... > >> > >> But both x AND y are created, but the "return value" is y. How can this > be advantageous for solving practical problems? Specifically, consider the > following code: > >> > >> F <- function(X) { expr; expr2; { expr5; expr7}; expr8;expr10} > >> > >> Both expr5 and expr7 are created, and are accessible by the code > outside of the nested braces right? But the "return value" of the nested > braces is expr7. So doesn't this mean that only expr7 should be accessible? > Please help me entangle thi...