search for: folding

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

...NG Z/A GIRTH 400MM FOLDS | {6,5,4,3,2,1,0} RR.05G | .6MM FLASHING GAL GIRTH 300MM FOLDS | {6,5,4,3,2,1,0} RR.09C | .6MM FLASHING C/B GIRTH 600MM FOLDS | {6,5,4,3,2,1,0} BS.09C | .6MM FLASHING C/B GIRTH 600MM FOLDS | {0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8} DN.TAPER | TAPPER CUTTING AND FOLDING SURCHARGE | {} ST.13G | .6MM FLASHING GAL 601-800MM FOLDS | {0,1,2,3,4,5,6} SR.06C | .6MM FLASHING C/B GIRTH 400MM FOLDS | {0,6,5,4,3,2,1} (10 rows) In the view as part of the debug I put this <%=h @flashing.inspect() %> which gave this result. #<FlashingCode:0xb7...

...in LLVM IR snans are always considered to be signalling. / Yes, this seems to be an agreement to treat "undef" as a SNaN for "fdiv". The question is whether we can make the same assumption for other floating point operations, or "fdiv" needs a correction to prevent folding since signalling of SNaNs might be disabled. >> /InstructionSimplify folds "mul %X, undef" to 0 always/ Sorry, I malformed this line and forgot to highlight that by "%X" I meant a constant here. So, constant folding comes into play. The result depends on the constant p...

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) # #

...quot;undef"/ (SimplifyFDivInst function in lib/Analysis/InstructionSimplify.cpp). Moreover, SimplifyFDivInst does not take into account whether signalling of SNaNs can be switched off or not - it always folds if one of the operands is /"undef"/. Another mysterious thing for me is folding of /"mul %X, undef"/. The result depends on whether %X is odd or even: * "undef" if %X is odd or equal to "undef"; * 0 otherwise. There is a similar bug 16258 about folding of /"fadd undef, undef"/. /"Add" /gets folded to /"undef"/...

Hi All, I found some cases where a spill of a live range in a block is reloaded only in one of its successors, and there is no reload in other paths through other successors. Since the spill is reloaded only in a certain path, it must be okay to sink such spill close to its reloads. In the AArch64 code below, there is a spill(x2) in the entry, but this value is reloaded only in %bb.1, not in

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()

...attern of an snan, > for some other fdiv optimization the compiler can choose it to be 1.0 > if that is convenient. > >> The question is whether we can make the same assumption for other >> floating point >> operations, or "fdiv" needs a correction to prevent folding since >> signalling of >> SNaNs might be disabled. > > You can assume that undef is an snan if you want in any floating point > operation. But what does that assumption buy you? If you are willing > to assume that the processor will trap on snans then it buys you a lot...

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 wit...

On 2018-02-22 11:14, gberry at codeaurora.org wrote: > FROM: llvm-dev [mailto:llvm-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org] ON BEHALF OF > Jun Lim via llvm-dev > SENT: Thursday, February 22, 2018 11:05 AM > > Hi All, > > I found some cases where a spill of a live range in a block is > reloaded only in one of its successors, and there is no reload in > other paths through other

Hi Duncan, On 17.09.2014 21:10, Duncan Sands wrote: > Hi Oleg, > > On 17/09/14 18:45, Oleg Ranevskyy wrote: >> Hi, >> >> Thank you for all your helpful comments. >> >> To sum up, below is the list of correct folding examples for fadd: >> (1) fadd %x, -0.0 -> %x >> (2) fadd undef, undef -> undef >> (3) fadd %x, undef -> NaN (undef is a NaN which >> is propagated) >> >> Looking through the code I found the...

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

Hi, Thank you for all your helpful comments. To sum up, below is the list of correct folding examples for fadd: (1) fadd %x, -0.0 -> %x (2) fadd undef, undef -> 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 instanc...

From: llvm-dev [mailto:llvm-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org] On Behalf Of Jun Lim via llvm-dev Sent: Thursday, February 22, 2018 11:05 AM Hi All, I found some cases where a spill of a live range in a block is reloaded only in one of its successors, and there is no reload in other paths through other successors. Since the spill is reloaded only in a certain path, it must be okay to sink such

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

> From: junbuml at codeaurora.org [mailto:junbuml at codeaurora.org] > Sent: Thursday, February 22, 2018 11:39 AM > > On 2018-02-22 11:14, gberry at codeaurora.org wrote: > > FROM: llvm-dev [mailto:llvm-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org] ON BEHALF OF > > Jun Lim via llvm-dev > > SENT: Thursday, February 22, 2018 11:05 AM > > > > Hi All, > > > > I

> 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

...The result in this case is some default NaN value. > > This means "fadd %x, -0.0", which is currently folded to %x by InstructionSimplify, might produce a different result if %x is a NaN. This breaks the NaN propagation rules the IEEE standard establishes and significantly reduces folding capabilities for the FP operations. > > This also applies to "fadd undef, undef" and "fadd %x, undef". We can't rely on getting an arbitrary NaN here on ARMs. > > Would you be able to confirm this please? > > Thank you in advance for your time! > &gt...

...t; representable in the destination format"./ thanks for finding this out. > > Floating point add propagates 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 possibili...