search for: signifcance

Dear list, I calculated the kappa-accuracy for two differnt classifications. How can I test now the two kappa-value for significance? thanks, Mark ..................................................................... Markus Schwarz Wissenschaftliche Mitarbeiterin Eidg. Forschungsanstalt WSL Forschungsprogramm Musterland Z??rcherstrasse 111 CH-8903 Birmensdorf Telefon +41-44-739 22 87 Fax

Greetings: I'm running R-1.9.1 on Fedora Core 2 Linux. I tested a proportional odds logistic regression with MASS's polr and Design's lrm. Parameter estimates between the 2 are consistent, but the standard errors are quite different, and the conclusions from the t and Wald tests are dramatically different. I cranked the "abstol" argument up quite a bit in the polr

On Fri, Jul 17, 2009 at 4:14 PM, Jonathan Gray<jsg at goblin.cx> wrote: > This seems to go against notes such as > http://clang.llvm.org/features.html#performance > which claim clang is signifcantly faster than gcc. I think the URL you want is actually http://clang.llvm.org/performance.html. The difference isn't as dramatic when you consider code generation, at least for the

On Fri, Jul 17, 2009 at 04:41:55PM -0700, Eli Friedman wrote: > On Fri, Jul 17, 2009 at 4:14 PM, Jonathan Gray<jsg at goblin.cx> wrote: > > This seems to go against notes such as > > http://clang.llvm.org/features.html#performance > > which claim clang is signifcantly faster than gcc. > > I think the URL you want is actually >

On Fri, Jul 17, 2009 at 5:12 PM, Jonathan Gray<jsg at goblin.cx> wrote: > On Fri, Jul 17, 2009 at 04:41:55PM -0700, Eli Friedman wrote: >> On Fri, Jul 17, 2009 at 4:14 PM, Jonathan Gray<jsg at goblin.cx> wrote: >> > This seems to go against notes such as >> > http://clang.llvm.org/features.html#performance >> > which claim clang is signifcantly

Hi everyone, As part of my work for Mozilla's Low Level Tools team I've implemented PGO in the Rust compiler. The feature is available since Rust 1.37 [1]. However, so far we have not seen any actual performance gains from enabling PGO for Rust code. Performance even seems to drop 1-3% with PGO enabled. I wonder why that is and I'm hoping that someone here might have experience

Hi all, I hope that i've posted this in the correct place. if not, please accept my apologies (where should this go?) I have carried out experimental removal of bivalves at 2 intertidal shores. Bivalves were removed by raking of surface sediments. I wish compare the biomass values of for a total of 8 species between the 2 shores My 3 treatments are: Undisturbed Controls (Cont), Procedural

I'd look at if_spppsubr.o, which is big in the llvm directories and doesn't appear in the gcc directory listings at all (I assume the listings were fed through tail or something, but there's clearly a sizeable difference there) On Jul 17, 2009, at 5:41 PMPDT, Daniel Dunbar wrote: > On Fri, Jul 17, 2009 at 5:12 PM, Jonathan Gray<jsg at goblin.cx> wrote: >> On

I have a set of data that comprises genome numbers in single eggs from three different parasite clones - 3D7, HB3, and MIX. I can draw a boxplot of the genome numbers for each clonefed but how do I carry out a t test or ANOVA to compare if the means are signifcantly different? (Data is listed below) Many thanks, Georgina Humphreys clonefed genomes HB3 21.3 HB3 23.5 HB3 25.9 3D7 27.2 HB3 28.1

So it would appear that llvm-gcc and clang are both slower than gcc4 which is infamous for being slow at compiling code, and yes this is with a release build/--enable-optimizations. This seems to go against notes such as http://clang.llvm.org/features.html#performance which claim clang is signifcantly faster than gcc. Below are some times and the larger object files when compiling an i386

On 30 Jul 2014, at 21:29, Ulrich Weigand wrote: > The ELFv1 ABI is used on 64-bit big-endian Linux and AIX. There's one small difference between the two: with the 64 bit ELFv1/ SVR4 ABI, tail padding for structs passed by value is only performed in case the struct is larger than 8 bytes, while for AIX 64 bit it's always done. As an aside, on Darwin/ppc64 it's done if the

...8.0 n50 :6 Mean :561.8 r10 :6 3rd Qu.:631.8 r5 :6 Max. :731.0 Redo LM with releveled data > modelRelev<-lm(biomass~clipping, data=comp) Different results. (Some parts, Residuals and Std Errors, are the same) Especially note the Pr and Signifcance columns are different. > summary(modelRelev) Call: lm(formula = biomass ~ clipping, data = comp) Residuals: Min 1Q Median 3Q Max -103.333 -49.667 3.417 43.375 177.667 Coefficients: Estimate Std. Error t value Pr(>|...

On Thu, Sep 12, 2019 at 8:18 AM Teresa Johnson <tejohnson at google.com> wrote: > I just have a couple suggestions off the top of my head: > - have you tried using the new pass manager > (-fexperimental-new-pass-manager)? That has access to additional analysis > info during inlining and is able to make more precise PGO based inline > decisions. > (although note the above

Hi, I had two questions regarding random forests for regression. 1) I have read the original paper by Breiman as well as a paper dicussing an application of random forests and it appears that the one of the nice features of this technique is good predictive ability. However I have some data with which I have generated a linear model using lm(). I can get an RMS error of 0.43 and an R^2 of

Hi I have data from 12 subjects. The measurement is log(expression) of a particular gene and can be assumed to be normally distributed. The 12 subjects are divided into the following groups: Infected, Vaccinated, Lesions - 3 measurements Infected, Vaccintaed, No Lesions - 2 measurements Infected, Not Vaccinated, Lesions - 4 measurements Uninfected, Not Vaccinated, No Lesions - 3 measurements

Gday, This is a repost since I only had one direct reply and I remain mystified- This may be stupidity on my part but it may not be so simple. In brief, my problem is I'm not sure how to extract parameter values/effect sizes from a nonlinear regression model with a significant interaction term. My data sets are dose response curves (force and dose) for muscle that also have two

Interesting. By ld do you mean GNU ld? I know GNU ld does "work" with LLVM's gold plugin, but it's an untested combination and not recommended. I wouldn't be surprised if there were some issues around it not passing necessary info to the gold plugin. Teresa On Mon, Sep 16, 2019 at 8:41 AM Michael Woerister <mwoerister at mozilla.com> wrote: > So one interesting

On Jul 17, 2009, at 4:41 PM, Eli Friedman wrote: > On Fri, Jul 17, 2009 at 4:14 PM, Jonathan Gray<jsg at goblin.cx> wrote: >> This seems to go against notes such as >> http://clang.llvm.org/features.html#performance >> which claim clang is signifcantly faster than gcc. > > I think the URL you want is actually > http://clang.llvm.org/performance.html. The

Hello, Does anyone knows how to do the plots from discriminant analysis (lda and qda)? Is there any computed function to do the stepwise procedure? thank you in advance Marta

Hello! I do not understand what is meant by: "aic" and "bic" follow a top-down strategy based on the Akaike's and Schwarz's information criteria in the datails to the ADF.test function. What does a "top-down strategy" mean? Probably the respective criterion is minimized and the mode vector contains the lag orders at which the criterion attains it