search for: friedmans

Estimados Este es el test de friedman que se logra asi library(PMCMR) y <- matrix(c( 3.88, 5.64, 5.76, 4.25, 5.91, 4.33, 30.58, 30.14, 16.92, 23.19, 26.74, 10.91, 25.24, 33.52, 25.45, 18.85, 20.45, 26.67, 4.44, 7.94, 4.04, 4.4, 4.23, 4.36, 29.41, 30.72, 32.92, 28.23, 23.35, 12, 38.87, 33.12, 39.15, 28.06, 38.23, 26.65),nrow=6, ncol=6, dimnames=list(1:6,LETTERS[1:6])) print(y)

Hello, I have problems interpreting the results of a Friedman test. It seems to me that the p-value resulting from a Friedman test and with it the "significance" has to be interpreted in another way than the p-value resulting from e.g. ANOVA? Let me describe the problem with some detail: I'm testing a lot of different hypotheses in my observer study and only for some the premises

I am trying to use the friedman.test() on a data frame, d, but I am receiving the following error message: > d AW HS IAC WA 1 6 8 3 5 2 2 2 3 6 3 7 7 8 3 4 8 5 4 5 .... 20 2 5 2 7 21 7 7 6 7 22 7 8 6 8 23 6 8 4 5 24 5 7 5 2 > friedman.test(d) Error in any(is.na(groups)) : argument "groups" is missing, with no default I think I

Hello everyone, I have been trying to perform a Friedman test for a while with no success. I have tried the command: > friedman.test (y~A|B, data = mydata), but it doesn't work . I searched youtube for help, but still could not find much. Can anyone help me with that! Thank you very much, Pedro [[alternative HTML version deleted]]

There are two misspellings in the german Error message for friedman test: Fehler in friedman.test.default(cont$score, group = cont$goup, blocks = cont$cont) : y, Gruppen und blöcke müssen die sekbe Länge haben The correct spelling would be: Fehler in friedman.test.default(cont$score, group = cont$goup, blocks = cont$cont) : y, Gruppen und *Blöcke* müssen die *selbe* Länge haben Instead of

---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Ryan Taylor <ryta1203 at gmail.com> Date: Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 4:58 PM Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] GetElementPtr To: Eli Friedman <eli.friedman at gmail.com> Sorry, So what I'm trying to ask is are the widths given (32, 64) for the index and the offset the widths of the index and offset values or the width of the type they are

I have to start by saying that I am new to R, so I might miss something crucial here. It seems to me that the results of friedman.test and ks.test are "wrong". Now, obviously, the first thing which crossed my mind was "it can't be, this is a package used by so many, someone should have observed", but I can't figure out what it might be. Problem: let's start with

I have R version 2.11.1 I am able to run a Friedman.test, but cant do further post.hoc test. Tried running "friedman.test.with.post.hoc"etc It comes with "Error: object 'friedman.test.with.post.hoc' not found" This is after loading the packages "coin" and "multcomp" Could anyone please send in any suggestions how to ratify? -- View this message

I apply patch, it says patch is applied. Does the directory which I run patch matters ?   =========================================== Phone : 82-42-860-1838 Fax : 82-42-860-6790 Cell Phone: 82-10-7599-1981 =========================================== --- On Mon, 10/24/11, Eli Friedman <eli.friedman at gmail.com> wrote: From: Eli Friedman <eli.friedman at gmail.com> Subject: Re:

Dear all, I'm using friedman rank test in R. Need to know how to calculate rank sum in friedman test (R options to get rank sum in friedman test). Kindly help me. With regards jeevitesh

So in this example: %idx = getelementptr { float*, i32 }* %MyStruct, i64 0, i32 1 Why is it picking i64 for the index but i32 for the offset? On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 4:58 PM, Ryan Taylor <ryta1203 at gmail.com> wrote: > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Ryan Taylor <ryta1203 at gmail.com> > Date: Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 4:58 PM > Subject: Re:

Yes, I applied the patch on trunk version like below. It says patching file. However, when I make, the build is still failing. janarbek at ubuntu:~/Work/llvm/llvm$ patch -p0 < unistd.txt patching file lib/Support/Unix/Path.inc   =========================================== Phone : 82-42-860-1838 Fax : 82-42-860-6790 Cell Phone: 82-10-7599-1981

On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 4:58 PM, janarbek <canarbekmatay at yahoo.com> wrote: > > I apply patch, it says patch is applied. Does the directory which I run patch matters ? You should be running the "patch -p0 < unistd.txt" in the root LLVM source directory for the trunk version. If you're still getting "Hunk #1 FAILED at 51." errors, you're not doing

On Aug 21, 2009, at 10:27 PM, Eli Friedman wrote: > On Fri, Aug 21, 2009 at 5:05 PM, Jakub Staszak<kuba at gcc.gnu.org> > wrote: >> >> On Aug 21, 2009, at 10:02 PM, Eli Friedman wrote: >> >>> On Fri, Aug 21, 2009 at 4:53 PM, Jakub Staszak<kuba at gcc.gnu.org> >>> wrote: >>>> >>>> On Aug 21, 2009, at 8:46 PM, Eli

Eli Friedman <eli.friedman at gmail.com> writes: > int_x86_avx_vhadd_pd_xmm doesn't exist on trunk. Why does it exist on > your branch if the semantics are exactly equivalent to > int_x86_sse3_hadd_pd? The register allocator can handle converting to > three-address form if the target provides the appropriate hooks. Because in some cases users may want to explicitly use

The patch does inseret unistd.h as below. However, I am still getting exactly same error when I do make.if you have any suggestions please let me know. #if HAVE_UNISTD_H #include <unistd.h> #endif   =========================================== Phone : 82-42-860-1838 Fax : 82-42-860-6790 Cell Phone: 82-10-7599-1981 =========================================== --- On Mon, 10/24/11, Eli

On Wed, Jul 14, 2010 at 10:54 AM, Eli Friedman <eli.friedman at gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Jul 14, 2010 at 8:33 AM, Andrew Lenharth <andrewl at lenharth.org> wrote: >> On Wed, Jul 14, 2010 at 10:26 AM, Eli Friedman <eli.friedman at gmail.com> wrote: >>> On Wed, Jul 14, 2010 at 3:20 AM, Torvald Riegel >>> <torvald at se.inf.tu-dresden.de> wrote:

On Sat, Jul 23, 2011 at 6:32 PM, Eli Friedman <eli.friedman at gmail.com> wrote: > On Sat, Jul 23, 2011 at 5:09 PM, Talin <viridia at gmail.com> wrote: >> So this was working fine for me until a few days ago when I checked out the >> most recent LLVM - the one with the new type system. Now I am getting the >> same error that I was getting previously. >> Is it

By LLVM do you mean the backend? I'm not using the backend, so is that i32 on the 0 index the type of the index value or the type of the value to which exists at that index? it seems the pointer itself has no width, it's arbitrary and is handled in the lowering and is target dependent on the bus width. Basically, when I am computing offset I need to know the sizes for add. The size of

Micah, can you document this in the release notes? On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 4:34 PM, Eli Friedman <eli.friedman at gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 4:11 PM, Ryan Taylor <ryta1203 at gmail.com> wrote: >> Has this been removed/replaced? Couldn't find anything in the release notes. > > Renamed DataLayout. > > -Eli >