search for: inaccuracy

...(i >= j) next lines(c(i,i),c(j,j+r[i,j]/maxabsr/2), lwd=3) lines(c(i-.2,i+.2),c(j,j), col=gray(.7)) } text(i, i, v[i], srt=-45, adj=0) } ----- Frank Harrell Department of Biostatistics, Vanderbilt University -- View this message in context: http://r.789695.n4.nabble.com/lines-lwd-3-inaccuracy-tp3603375p3603375.html Sent from the R help mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Thank you. Alexei just committed the change to SVN. Regards, Marco Leogrande Sent by a carbon-based life form; hence, it may contain repetitions, inaccuracies, logical fallacies and repetitions. On Wed, Jun 17, 2015 at 2:52 PM, Galina Kistanova <gkistanova at gmail.com> wrote: > LGTM. > Please commit. > > Thanks > > Galina > > On Tue, Jun 16, 2015 at 8:32 PM,

Hi, I found the following strange effect with qbinom & partial argument matching p0 <- pbinom(0, size = 3, prob = 0.25) qbinom(p0, size = 3, prob = 0.25) ## 0 o.k. qbinom(p0-0.05, size = 3, prob = 0.25) ## 0 o.k. ## positional matching: qbinom(p0, 3, 0.25) ## 0 o.k. ## partial argument matching: qbinom(p0 , s = 3, p = 0.25) ## 1 ??? qbinom(p0-0.05,

Galina, thanks again for your help. I have cooked a new patch that should make a bit more sense. I have added the new builder under _get_experimental_scheduled_builders(), as the comment above that function suggested me it would be a good idea. :) Does it look a reasonable start? Regards, Marco Leogrande Sent by a carbon-based life form; hence, it may contain repetitions, inaccuracies,

Hi all, I'm having some problems with inaccurate sampling rates between sending and receiving party. (Using a simple raw UDP protocol sending packets from speex to speex) Both PC's have their soundcard set to 8 khz, but the samplerate seems to differ slightly between machines. The problem I have is that the sending machine sometimes samples with a slightly lower rate than the player

Hello, I have been working with various probability distributions in R, and it seems the gamma distribution is inaccurate for some inputs. For example, qgamma(1e-100, 5e-101, lower.tail=FALSE) gives: 1.0. However, it seems this is incorrect; I think the correct answer should be 0.082372029620717283. When I check these numbers using pgamma, I get: pgamma(1,5e-101, lower.tail=FALSE) =

I came across this: shouldn't the last value be a more exact zero? It did not do that with 1 - sum( rep(0.1, 10) ) > 1 - cumsum( rep(0.1, 10) ) [1] 9.000000e-01 8.000000e-01 7.000000e-01 6.000000e-01 5.000000e-01 4.000000e-01 3.000000e-01 2.000000e-01 [9] 1.000000e-01 1.110223e-16 > version _ platform

Hello, I need to use the confluent function of second kind, also known as Tricomi function. It is implemented as kummerU() function in fAsianOptions package, but I've found very inaccurate values, comparing with those provided by Mathematica. I think Mathematica values are OK because kummerU values leads to negative probabilities. For example, if you try the kummerU() function example, you

Hi, Cosmetic. Starting R with e.g. --max-ppsize=-10 produces the following warning: WARNING: '-max-ppsize' value is negative: ignored The name of the option displayed in the warning is incorrect. Could that be fixed? See src/main/CommandLineArgs.c (there are 3 places in that file where the name of this option needs to be adjusted). This is with current R-alpha. Thanks! H. --

Hi, In man page for duplicated: Value: ?duplicated()?: For a vector input, a logical vector of the same length as ?x?. For a data frame, a logical vector with one element for each row. For a matrix or array, a logical array with the same dimensions and dimnames. When 'x' is a matrix or array, the returned value is NOT a logical array: > m <-

Hello. I am reading changelogs from rails master git branch from time to time, because I like to know what''s new. But every time, there are some errors. Mainly in version releases dates. For example in actionpack changelog (https://github.com/rails/rails/blob/ 6481bc5f49ef26e8fde68ac964dc984d12f33189/actionpack/CHANGELOG.md) is last released version Rails 3.1.0. We all know, that latest

...e 'page_num' nomenclature really confused me here. It is the number of bits being set in the bitmap. Seems like calling it nr_pages or num_pages would be more appropriate. Isn't this bitmap out of date by the time it's send up to the hypervisor? Is there something that makes the inaccuracy OK here?

...e 'page_num' nomenclature really confused me here. It is the number of bits being set in the bitmap. Seems like calling it nr_pages or num_pages would be more appropriate. Isn't this bitmap out of date by the time it's send up to the hypervisor? Is there something that makes the inaccuracy OK here?

Hi, Man page for 'convolve' says: conj: logical; if 'TRUE', take the complex _conjugate_ before back-transforming (default, and used for usual convolution). The complex conjugate of 'x', of 'y', of both? In fact it seems that it takes the complex conjugate of 'y' only which is OK but might be worth mentioning because (1) conj=TRUE is the

G'day Duncan, On Tue, 12 Jan 2016 07:32:05 -0500 Duncan Murdoch <murdoch.duncan at gmail.com> wrote: > On 11/01/2016 11:59 PM, Berwin A Turlach wrote: > > G'day all, > > > > In Chapter 1.4 (Writing package vignettes) the Writing R Extensions > > manual states: > > > > By default @code{R CMD build} will run @code{Sweave} on all > >

Full_Name: Vlad Stolin Version: R 2.0.0 OS: Windows 2000 Submission from: (NULL) (204.128.232.211) When generating the sequence using seq() function with non-integer numbers result is somewhat unpredictable. Example: > v1<-seq(1.60,1.90,.05) > v2<-c(1.60,1.65,1.70,1.75,1.80,1.85,1.90) > v1-v2 [1] 0.000000e+00 2.220446e-16 2.220446e-16 0.000000e+00 0.000000e+00 0.000000e+00

I'm working on this issue, thank you for reporting it. The short answer is that the callgraph reported by TD is the same as discovered/computed during BU (and BU can't determine the indirect call can only target C2). I've added this example, and a few other related tests, to the DSA's test suite[1] to document this behavior while I'm working out what the best solution is.

Full_Name: Version: 2.7.1 (2008-06-23) OS: windows vista Submission from: (NULL) (216.82.144.137) Hello, I have been working with various probability distributions in R, and it seems the gamma distribution is inaccurate for some inputs. For example, qgamma(1e-100, 5e-101, lower.tail=FALSE) gives: 1.0. However, it seems this is incorrect; I think the correct answer should be

Hello Marco, Welcome aboard! slaves.py keeps the build slaves definitions, builders.py keeps the builders definitions. You have to have both. The steps of adding a new slave is here: http://llvm.org/docs/HowToAddABuilder.html. Please make sure you done the step # 10 before bringing your slave up, otherwise it wouldn't be authorized by the master and will be blacklisted after multiple

G'day all, In Chapter 1.4 (Writing package vignettes) the Writing R Extensions manual states: By default @code{R CMD build} will run @code{Sweave} on all Sweave vignette source files in @file{vignettes}. If @file{Makefile} is found in the vignette source directory, then @code{R CMD build} will try to run @command{make} after the @code{Sweave} runs, otherwise @code{texi2pdf} is run on