search for: folded

Hello. My name is Akashah. i work at metabolic laboratory. From my study, i found that volcano plot can help a lot in my section.  i already studied about the volcano plot and get the coding to run in R software, unfortunately, there is may be something wrong with the coding. This is because  no graph appear, but no error (blue color text) was shown on the R console. Below is the coding for

Hi I have a problem accessing an array field in a Postgresql database. Here is the table definition. View "neil.flashing_codes" Column | Type | Modifiers -------------+-----------------------+----------- code | character varying(10) | description | text | folds | integer[] | View definition: SELECT

Hi Duncan, Thank you a lot for your time to provide that great and informative explanation. Now the "undef" logic makes much more sense for me. >> /You are wrong to say that "div undef, %X" is folded to "undef" by InstructionSimplify, it is folded to zero./ My mistake. I meant to say "*f****div* undef, %X" is folded to "undef" (not integer "div"). >> /Fdiv is harder than div because a floating point division by 0.0 has a defined result, unlike...

HELLO, anybody... could you help me to check the below coding for volcano. what is the mistake? what the plot could not display? # volcano_plot.r # # Author: Amsha Nahid, Jairus Bowne, Gerard Murray # Purpose: Produces a volcano plot # # Input: Data matrix as specified in Data-matrix-format.pdf # Output: Plots log2(fold change) vs log10(t-test P-value) # #

.../llvm.org/docs/LangRef.html#undefined-values However, those examples do not cover all of the possible contexts where /"undef"/ can appear. E.g., I can't realize why /"fmul undef, undef"/ may not result in/"undef"/ whereas /"mul undef, undef"/ is always folded to /"undef"/. Seems I am missing something important about floats here. The same applies to "fdiv". /"fdiv undef, undef"/ is not folded but /"div %X, undef"/ and /"div undef, %X"/ are folded to /"undef"/ (SimplifyFDivInst function in l...

...n %bb.1 with a mov instruction. As we move such spill down to its successor, we can also encourage more shrink-wrapping as well. .globl _mytest // %bb.0: // %entry sub sp, sp, #224 // =224 stp x28, x27, [sp, #128] // 8-byte Folded Spill stp x26, x25, [sp, #144] // 8-byte Folded Spill stp x24, x23, [sp, #160] // 8-byte Folded Spill stp x22, x21, [sp, #176] // 8-byte Folded Spill stp x20, x19, [sp, #192] // 8-byte Folded Spill stp x29, x30, [sp, #208]...

HI, Dear R community, I am writing the following function to create one data set(*tree.pred*) and one vector(*valid.out*) from loops. Later, I want to use the data set from this loop to plot curves. I have tried return, list, but I can not use the *tree.pred* data and *valid.out* vector. auc.tree<- function(msplit,mbucket) { * tree.pred<-data.frame()

...>> meant a >> constant here. So, constant folding comes into play. The result >> depends on the >> constant parity. E.g.: >> mul i64 5, undef --> undef >> mul i64 4, undef --> 0 >> I still have difficulty understanding why the first one is folded to >> "undef". >> "Undef" could be zero, so the result is also zero. Besides, if >> "undef" isn't >> zero, it's impossible to get an arbitrary bit pattern anyway. The >> result will >> always be divisible by 5. > > N...

All, The CentOS Folding at Home team has cracked the top 10% of all the folding teams. We could use some more members that have CPU Cycles to spare :) Folding at Home is a great distributed computing program that is used to process items for medical research teams. It is similar to SETI at Home (if you are familiar with that). Here is info on Folding AT Home: http://folding.stanford.edu/

...such spill down to > its successor, we can also encourage more shrink-wrapping as well. > > .globl _mytest > > // %bb.0: // %entry > > sub sp, sp, #224 // =224 > > stp x28, x27, [sp, #128] // 8-byte Folded Spill > > stp x26, x25, [sp, #144] // 8-byte Folded Spill > > stp x24, x23, [sp, #160] // 8-byte Folded Spill > > stp x22, x21, [sp, #176] // 8-byte Folded Spill > > stp x20, x19, [sp, #192] // 8-byte Folded Spi...

...ef is a NaN which >> is propagated) >> >> Looking through the code I found the "NoNaNs" flag accessed through >> an instance >> of the FastMathFlags class. >> (2) and (3) should probably depend on it. >> If the flag is set, (2) and (3) cannot be folded as there are no NaNs >> and we are >> not guaranteed to get an arbitrary bit pattern from fadd, right? > > I think it's exactly the other way round: if NoNans is set then you > can fold (2) and (3) to undef. That's because (IIRC) the NoNans flag > promises that n...

cv.fold<-function(i, size=3, rang=0.3){ cat('Fold ', i, '\n') out.fold.c <-((i-1)*c.each.part +1):(i*c.each.part) out.fold.n <-((i-1)*n.each.part +1):(i*n.each.part) train.cv <- n.cc[-out.fold.c, c(2:2401, 2417)] train.nv <- n.nn[-out.fold.n, c(2:2401, 2417)] train.v<-rbind(train.cv, train.nv) #training data for feature

...undef (3) fadd %x, undef -> NaN (undef is a NaN which is propagated) Looking through the code I found the "NoNaNs" flag accessed through an instance of the FastMathFlags class. (2) and (3) should probably depend on it. If the flag is set, (2) and (3) cannot be folded as there are no NaNs and we are not guaranteed to get an arbitrary bit pattern from fadd, right? Other arithmetic FP operations (fsub, fmul, fdiv) also propagate NaNs. Thus, the same rules seem applicable to them as well: --------------------------------------------------------------------- - fd...

...n %bb.1 with a mov instruction. As we move such spill down to its successor, we can also encourage more shrink-wrapping as well. .globl _mytest // %bb.0: // %entry sub sp, sp, #224 // =224 stp x28, x27, [sp, #128] // 8-byte Folded Spill stp x26, x25, [sp, #144] // 8-byte Folded Spill stp x24, x23, [sp, #160] // 8-byte Folded Spill stp x22, x21, [sp, #176] // 8-byte Folded Spill stp x20, x19, [sp, #192] // 8-byte Folded Spill stp x29, x30, [sp, #208]...

Hello! I have a question. I am working with createFolds: folds<- trainControl(method='cv', index=createFolds(data$Score,list = TRUE)) I need to iterate over folds to extract the indexes from each fold. For example, if I do folds$index$Fold01, it contains: 5 11 17 29 44 50 52 64 65 I need to iterate over each $Fold_i to extract the indexes, but I can't do it because I

I am new to R and have two scripts written slightly different but should to relatively the same thing but my lack of experience with the program I can not figure out the what I need to do to correct it. The first script gives me a consistent mean fold change values with every run but can generate negative p values for some. For the second version of the script, the fold changes seem to be very

...or, we can also encourage more shrink-wrapping as well. > > > > .globl _mytest > > > > // %bb.0: // %entry > > > > sub sp, sp, #224 // =224 > > > > stp x28, x27, [sp, #128] // 8-byte Folded Spill > > > > stp x26, x25, [sp, #144] // 8-byte Folded Spill > > > > stp x24, x23, [sp, #160] // 8-byte Folded Spill > > > > stp x22, x21, [sp, #176] // 8-byte Folded Spill > > > > stp x20, x19...

> On Aug 27, 2014, at 6:34 AM, Duncan Sands <duncan.sands at deepbluecap.com> wrote: > > I think you should try to get LLVM floating point experts involved, to find out their opinion about whether LLVM should really assume that snans always trap. > > If they think it is fine to assume trapping, then you can fold any floating point operation with an "undef" operand

As far as I know, LLVM does not try very hard to guarantee constant folded NaN payloads that match exactly what the target would generate. —Owen > On Sep 16, 2014, at 10:30 AM, Oleg Ranevskyy <llvm.mail.list at gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi Duncan, > > I reread everything we've discussed so far and would like to pay closer attention to the the ARM&...

...a NaN. There is no conversion in the context of > LLVM's fadd. So, if %x in "fadd %x, -0.0" is a NaN, the result is also a NaN > with the same payload. Yes, folding "fadd %x, -0.0" to "%x" is correct. This implies that "fadd undef, undef" can be folded to "undef". > > As regards "fadd %x, undef", where %x might be a NaN and undef might be chosen > to be (probably some different) NaN, and a possibility to fold this to a > constant (NaN), the standard says: > /"If two or more inputs are NaN, then the payload...