search for: reassessing

Dear R users, I am pleased to announce the release of a new packaged called `bcrm? (version 0.1), now available on CRAN. The package implements a wide range of Bayesian continuous reassessment method (CRM) designs to be used in Phase I dose-escalation trials. The package is fully documented and highlights include ? A choice of 1-parameter working models or the 2-parameter logistic model.

Dear R users, I am pleased to announce the release of a new packaged called `bcrm? (version 0.1), now available on CRAN. The package implements a wide range of Bayesian continuous reassessment method (CRM) designs to be used in Phase I dose-escalation trials. The package is fully documented and highlights include ? A choice of 1-parameter working models or the 2-parameter logistic model.

Here is our current rating scale for the HCL: 1 = protocol based on reverse engineering 2 = based on fragments of publicly available protocol 3 = based on publicly available protocol 4 = vendor provided protocol 5 = vendor provided protocol and hardware I was going to suggest a few changes to the ratings we have assigned (for instance, not having a rating of "5" with an

...orted. In my ThinLTO prototype I was simply skipping the first METADATA_BLOCK and always parsing the second, since I knew from inspecting the BitcodeWriter that the second was the one with the METADATA_KIND records. When working on the implementation of this handling for the upstream patches, I am reassessing how to do this perhaps more robustly. A few options: 1) Should the two module-level blocks use different block ids since they hold different types of records? I.e. a METADATA_BLOCK_ID (holding the actual metadata) and a new METADATA_KIND_BLOCK_ID (for the metadata kind records). That way it is mor...

I'm curious why 'unsigned short w = 0x8000' is displayed as -32768 in the IR? This propagates to the DAG and hence tablegen, where I am missing matching on some immediates because the immediate is not being looked at as unsigned? For example, we have no issue if instead of 0x8000 we use 0x7FFF, then everything is fine, the match is fine. I can understand that it's just being

Dear all, Version 0.3 of the bcrm package is now available on CRAN. The package allows users to fit Bayesian Continuous Reassessment Method Phase I trial designs. This version has the following new developments from version 0.1: * Stopping rules have been added, allowing stopping to be based on a maximum sample size, the maximum number to be treated at the final MTD estimate, the precision

Dear all, Version 0.3 of the bcrm package is now available on CRAN. The package allows users to fit Bayesian Continuous Reassessment Method Phase I trial designs. This version has the following new developments from version 0.1: * Stopping rules have been added, allowing stopping to be based on a maximum sample size, the maximum number to be treated at the final MTD estimate, the precision

Tim, yes, I am on a very unique architecture, just about every instruction has a signed and unsigned operation (ie, adds, addu, subs, subu, etc...) and we handle signed and unsigned somewhat differently. I'm not sure how we'll handle this yet, very worst case scenario is to propagate the info from clang but that's not ideal, obviously. Thanks for all the replies! On Wed, Feb 15,

I have a large excel file with data in it. I converted it to a 'csv' format. I imported this dataset to R using the follownig command mldata <- read.csv("c:\\temp\\mldata.csv", header=T) all the column names and the rows seems to be correct. Now that I have this object, I need to perfrom hclust. I used the following hc <- hclust(dist(mldata), method="single")

Hi Everyone, My name is Matt Signorello and I'm responsible for wholesale dealers sales here at ISPBX. (www.ispbx.com) ISPBX is a New Jersey based systems developer marketing a series of solid state Asterisk appliances since 2005. For the last year we've been working on a new strategy for helping dealers install Asterisk appliances into the end user customer base in a smarter more

It seems to me that the RSpec bundle''s ''it'' snippet is in need of some love. By default, a newly inserted spec passes. This seems odd as it is misleading. It also makes it harder find what specs still need to be completed if you return to an RSpec module after a break. I propose that the ''it'' snippet is changed to the following: it

Hello I am entertaining the idea of putting some time and effort into making Facter and Puppet run on MS Windows. Call me crazy ... Does anyone know anything about the issues that I''m likely to face? What are the major stumbling blocks? Initially I''d be happy just getting File to work, this would be of tremendous value. I''m guessing that Facter will require the

puppet agent --verbose shows a verbose output of the changes done by puppet, such as: notice: /Stage[main]/Logstash::Config/Logstash::Configdir[agent]/File[/etc/logstash/agent/config]/owner: owner changed ''root'' to ''logstash'' notice: /Stage[main]/Varnish/Service[varnish]/ensure: ensure changed ''stopped'' to ''running''