search for: hypothetically

Dear colleagues, following John Fox' advice in this article (http://cran.r-project.org/doc/contrib/Fox-Companion/appendix-cox-regression.pdf), I'm trying to create a new data frame to examine the differential survival curves from a combination of covariates. These are derived from a Cox Proportional Hazards model I fit to data about the diffusion of a particular policy across American

Two * servers: *a and *b. Outside call comes in *b, and is automatically routed to *a. Someone on a sip phone connected to *a then decides to transfer the call to someone on a sip phone connected to *b. The transfer works. At this point, is *a still in the converstation? Or is * smart enough to see where the data stream is going/coming from? Thanks for any help in advanced, and sorry if

Dear R-Help listers, I am trying to estimate an proportional odds logistic regression model (or ordered logistic regression) and then make predictions by supplying a hypothetical x vector. However, somehow this does not work. I guess I must have missed something here. I first used the polr function in the MASS package, and I create a data frame and supply it to the predict function (see below):

I know this is casting a wide net, but If you were charged with building a large, public VOIP network with multiple PSTN gateways, the capacity to carry a lot of traffic and bill clients accurately, what pieces (brands, makes, models) would you use to assemble the solution? Assume that $$$ is not an issue. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL:

Hi, In ferret, and especially when using acts_as_ferret, it is easy to specify many fields. What is the cost of using a lot of fields from a performance perspective? Is each field searched separately, or are they combined together in the inverted index. As an extreme example, if I made every word in my documents a separate field (so the first word in each document was field 1 and the

First of all, this isn't a troll or a flame, it's a serious question. (Well, OK, two.) Is *ANYONE* known to have *EVER* gotten WINE to work with any Xserver other than XFree86? (AccelX, MetroX?) When was the last time anyone *tested* it on anything other than XFree86? I ask this because, about five years or so ago, I was using the WINE that was current at the time on XFree86 with a

Hi all, I've read through much of the list archives and other various docs and am now more confused than ever regarding how samba interacts with external services. All of the docs seem to assume that a Windows AD server is part of the picture when ldap/krb5 are involved. What I'm trying to do is set up a samba fileserver that Windows clients can connect to via something like: "net

Hypothetical question.. Lets say there is a situation where you are using the highest compression codecs for all extensions (I guess that would be G.729) and the load on a single server is overpowering the most powerful single processor(lets say SMP is not an option).. So two or more servers are required.. Or The situation is that you need fault tolerance so want to have two Asterisk

Last Friday, I noticed that it is difficult to work with regression models in which there are factors. It is easier to do the old fashioned thing of coding up "dummy" variables with 0-1 values. The predict function's newdata argument is not suited to insertion of hypothetical values for the factor, whereas it has no trouble with numeric variables. For example, if one uses a

> We don't require users to compile their own gcc. Are you saying it's > impossible to get pre-built CMake 2.8.12 and gcc 4.7 on either Mac or > Windows? And we wouldn't be requiring it for cmake. My point was that cmake is always easier to install: * From binaries: a bit easier, since they are provided in http://www.cmake.org/ * From source: way easier than gcc. Gosh, from

On Mon, 2015-11-09 at 21:35 -0800, Andy Lutomirski wrote: > > We could do it the other way around: on powerpc, if a PCI device is in > that range and doesn't have the "bypass" property at all, then it's > assumed to bypass the IOMMU.??This means that everything that > currently works continues working.??If someone builds a physical > virtio device or uses

On Mon, 2015-11-09 at 21:35 -0800, Andy Lutomirski wrote: > > We could do it the other way around: on powerpc, if a PCI device is in > that range and doesn't have the "bypass" property at all, then it's > assumed to bypass the IOMMU.??This means that everything that > currently works continues working.??If someone builds a physical > virtio device or uses

Hello everybody. I know this is user forum - but I also know that developers "lurks" in here from time to time. So I would like to ask... what do you (developers) think is the biggest issue in wine development? Is it money? How much would wine development process speed up if Codewavers would start selling... let say, 10 times more licenses for Crossover then they sell now? Would it be a

Dear R/Statistics-gurus! I tried to find answer to my hypothetical question and in vain. Sorry, I don't have a dataset that fits into this hypothetical question and pardon me if my explanations/use of statistical terms are not accurate. It does sound a weird question, but I want to rule out that line of thought. Is it possible to develop a model (or a simulation) such that the upper

On 23 May 2016, at 12:00, Lorenzo Laneve <lore97drk at icloud.com> wrote: > > This is the point, No, you are still failing to make a point. > High-level OO languages don't use malloc(), they use something else. That’s not entirely true. They need to get the memory that they provide to programs from somewhere. They may provide their own pool allocators, but they will often

Hello, Can anyone think of a non-iterative way to generate a decreasing geometric sequence in R? For example, for a hypothetical function dg, I would like: > dg(20) [1] 20 10 5 2 1 where I am using integer division by 2 to get each subsequent value in the sequence. There is of course: dg <- function(x) { res <- integer() while(x >= 1) { res <- c(res, x) x

On Sat, Oct 14, 2017 at 11:40:30AM +1100, Damien Miller wrote: > On Fri, 13 Oct 2017, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: > > more or less a year ago Kurt Roeckx provided an initial port towards the > > OpenSSL 1.1 API [0]. The patch has been left untouched [1] and it has > > been complained about a missing compat layer of the new vs the old API > > within the OpenSSL

After some more thought on this, I'm trying to work out whether the back link offset needs precision. Semantically, the only need we have for this is to be able to seek back to a point before the start of the earliest event still active at the time of the original seek. As far as I know, and please correct me if I'm wrong, nothing in Ogg mandates that this backlink actually resolves to a

Ady asked: > Have you read the "See also" section(s) of the wiki page(s)? Yes. > By reading the relevant wiki pages, a user should (_hopefully_) get to > the conclusion that the PATH directive is relevant for c32 modules, and > not a replacement for the CONFIG / INCLUDE directives nor for relative > paths based on the "Working Directory". There's nothing

On 1/18/2013 11:11 AM, Dimitri Tcaciuc wrote: > > Right, I see. Is there any other way to solve this? As the last resort, > I was considering silently transforming each Array argument into > separate data and metadata arguments, but that would certainly add other > complications I'd rather avoid. Depends on what information you have available. If all you have is the LLVM IR,