search for: x7

Dette er en melding med flere deler i MIME-format. --=_alternative 004C4E4A00257091_= Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Yes. so (x1*x2*x3*x4*x5*x6*x7*x8)^2 = (x1+x2+x3+x4+x5+x6+x7+x8)^8 ? and there is a difference in (x1*x2*x3*x4*x5*x6*x7*x8)^2 and (x1*x2*x3*x4*x5*x6*x7*x8) althoug the resulting formulas are the same, or? This fikses my problem, but R still crashes for the large formula. It may be due to stack owerflow, but i guess this can be...

...de at elkem.no wrote: > And some more informastion I forgot. > R does not crash if I write out the formula: > > set.seed(123) > x1 <- runif(1000) > x2 <- runif(1000) > x3 <- runif(1000) > x4 <- runif(1000) > x5 <- runif(1000) > x6 <- runif(1000) > x7 <- runif(1000) > x8 <- runif(1000) > y <- rnorm(1000) > fit <- lm(y~(x1*x2*x3*x4*x5*x6*x7*x8)^2) > -> R crashes > > fit <- lm(y~x1+x2+x3+x4+x5+x6+x7+x8 > +x1:x2+x1:x3+x1:x4+x1:x5+x1:x6+x1:x7+x1:x8 > +x2:x3++x2:x4+x2:x5+x2:x6+x2...

On Wed, 5 Oct 2005 Hallgeir.Grinde at elkem.no wrote: > Yes. > so (x1*x2*x3*x4*x5*x6*x7*x8)^2 = (x1+x2+x3+x4+x5+x6+x7+x8)^8 ? Yes in the sense that the simplified formula given by terms() is the same. > and there is a difference in > (x1*x2*x3*x4*x5*x6*x7*x8)^2 > and > (x1*x2*x3*x4*x5*x6*x7*x8) > althoug the resulting formulas are the same, or? The first is reduced t...

...e 004613C000257091_= Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" And some more informastion I forgot. R does not crash if I write out the formula: set.seed(123) x1 <- runif(1000) x2 <- runif(1000) x3 <- runif(1000) x4 <- runif(1000) x5 <- runif(1000) x6 <- runif(1000) x7 <- runif(1000) x8 <- runif(1000) y <- rnorm(1000) fit <- lm(y~(x1*x2*x3*x4*x5*x6*x7*x8)^2) -> R crashes fit <- lm(y~x1+x2+x3+x4+x5+x6+x7+x8 +x1:x2+x1:x3+x1:x4+x1:x5+x1:x6+x1:x7+x1:x8 +x2:x3++x2:x4+x2:x5+x2:x6+x2:x7+x2:x8 +x3:x4+x3:x...

.... i have these dataset:? set.seed(12345)? S=1000? generate <- function(size) {? x1 <- rnorm(size, mean=0, sd=1)? x2 <- rnorm(size, mean=0, sd=1)? x3 <- rnorm(size, mean=0, sd=1)? x4 <- rnorm(size, mean=0, sd=1)? x5 <- rnorm(size, mean=0, sd=1)? x6 <- rnorm(size, mean=0, sd=1)? x7 <- rnorm(size, mean=0, sd=1)? x8 <- rnorm(size, mean=0, sd=1)? x9 <- rnorm(size, mean=0, sd=1)? x10 <- rnorm(size, mean=0, sd=1)? e<-rnorm(size, mean=0, sd=1)? t_trueps <- (1 + exp( -(b0 + b1*x1 + b2*x2 + b3*x3 + b4*x4 + b5*x5 + b6*x6 + b7*x7? + b2*x2*x2 + b4*x4*x4 + b7*x7*x7 + b1...

Full_Name: Hallgeir Grinde Version: 2.1.1 OS: Windows XP Submission from: (NULL) (144.127.1.1) While using lm(y~(x*z*c*...*v)^2) R crashes/closes if the numbers of variables are at least 8.

...15 .18 .19 .18 .14 .11 .07 .16 .19 .21 .22 .35 1 .14 .25 .12 .09 .11 .09 .09 .11 .21 .17 .09 .05 .21 .23 .18 .39 .48 1 mod3.1_9<-specify.model(); X1 <-> X1,TD11,NA X2 <-> X2,TD22,NA X3 <-> X3,TD33,NA X4 <-> X4,TD44,NA X5 <-> X5,TD55,NA X6 <-> X6,TD66,NA X7 <-> X7,TD77,NA X8 <-> X8,TD88,NA X9 <-> X9,TD99,NA X1 <- xi1,LY11, NA X2 <- xi1,LY21, NA X3 <- xi1,LY31, NA X4 <- xi2,LY42, NA X5 <- xi2,LY52, NA X6 <- xi2,LY62, NA X7 <- xi3,LY73, NA X8 <- xi3,LY83, NA X9 <- xi3,LY93, NA xi1 <-> xi1,N...

Hello! I have a dataset like this: X1 X2 X3 X4 X5 X6 X7 X8 1 2 2 1 2 3 2 6 2 3 2 5 7 9 1 3 1 9 12 6 1 1 3 6 The columns X1-X6 contains ordinary numeric values. X7 contains the number of the first column that the rowMeans should be calculated from and...

...tological specimens. Both the rpart documentation and the output confirm that the program produces splits on continuous data that leave "holes" in the data. It is probably of little practical importance, but is there a reason why the binary splits are constructed in the form (e.g): x7 < 37 x7 > 37 as opposed to the actual CART (tm) methodology of: x7 <= 37 x7 > 37 It seems to me that if one were to use rpart to classify an unknown case where x7 = 37, the program wouldn't actually know which way to move the case. I've read through the rpart technical repo...

...000 #x2??? Numeric,3000 Numeric,3000 Numeric,3000 Numeric,3000 #x3??? Numeric,3000 Numeric,3000 Numeric,3000 Numeric,3000 #x4??? Numeric,3000 Numeric,3000 Numeric,3000 Numeric,3000 #x5??? Numeric,3000 Numeric,3000 Numeric,3000 Numeric,3000 #x6??? Numeric,3000 Numeric,3000 Numeric,3000 Numeric,3000 #x7??? Numeric,3000 Numeric,3000 Numeric,3000 Numeric,3000 #x8??? Numeric,3000 Numeric,3000 Numeric,3000 Numeric,3000 #x9??? Numeric,3000 Numeric,3000 Numeric,3000 Numeric,3000 #x10?? Numeric,3000 Numeric,3000 Numeric,3000 Numeric,3000 #t ??? Numeric,3000 Numeric,3000 Numeric,3000 Numeric,3000 #y???? N...

Hi All, I'm using the subset function to select a list of variables, some of which are contiguous in the data frame, and others of which are not. It works fine when I use the form: subset(mydata,select=c(x1,x3:x5,x7) ) In reality, my list is far more complex. So I would like to store it in a variable to substitute in for c(x1,x3:x5,x7) but cannot get it to work. That use of the c function seems to violate R rules, so I'm not sure how it works at all. A small simulation of the problem is below. If the va...

...ion I forgot. > > R does not crash if I write out the formula: > > > > set.seed(123) > > x1 <- runif(1000) > > x2 <- runif(1000) > > x3 <- runif(1000) > > x4 <- runif(1000) > > x5 <- runif(1000) > > x6 <- runif(1000) > > x7 <- runif(1000) > > x8 <- runif(1000) > > y <- rnorm(1000) > > fit <- lm(y~(x1*x2*x3*x4*x5*x6*x7*x8)^2) > > -> R crashes > > > > fit <- lm(y~x1+x2+x3+x4+x5+x6+x7+x8 > > +x1:x2+x1:x3+x1:x4+x1:x5+x1:x6+x1:x7+x1:x8 > >...

Does anyone know how to pass a list of parameters into a function? for example: somefun=function(x1,x2,x3,x4,x5,x6,x7,x8,x9){ ans=x1+x2+x3+x4+x5+x6+x7+x8+x9 return(ans) } somefun(1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9) # I would like this to work: temp=c(x3=3,x4=4,x5=5,x6=6,x7=7,x8=8,x9=9) somefun(x1=1,x2=2,temp) # OR I would like this to work: temp=list(x3=3,x4=4,x5=5,x6=6,x7=7,x8=8,x9=9) somefun(x1=1,x2=2,temp) [[altern...

...mit, scope=list(lower=frm1,upper=frm2)) > bst Summary of Bootstrapping the 'stepAIC()' procedure for Call: lm(formula = y1 ~ ., data = dat) Bootstrap samples: 50 Direction: forward Penalty: 2 * df Covariates selected (%) x1 100 x2 100 x3 100 x4 100 x5 100 x6 100 x7 100 x8 100 Coefficients Sign + (%) - (%) x3 100 0 x6 100 0 x8 100 0 x1 90 10 x2 86 14 x7 62 38 x4 44 56 x5 0 100 Stat Significance (%) x3 100 x6 100 x8 100 x5 34 x2 20 x1 16 x4 10 x7 4 The stepAIC() for the original data-set gave Call...

...lease help me to correct it and give some suggestions. My programs: data<-matrix(rnorm(400),ncol=8) #sample size is 50 data<-data.frame(data) names(data)<-c(paste("x",1:8,sep="")) #8 independent variables,x1-x8; #logistic regression model is logit(y)=x1+x2+x3+x4+x5+x6+x7+x8 data$y<-exp(data$x1+data$x2+data$x3+data$x4+data$x5+data$x6+data$x7+data$x8)/(1+(data$x1+data$x2+data$x3+data$x4+data$x5+data$x6+data$x7+data$x8)) logist<-glm(y~.,family=binomial(),data=simdata) *Warning messages:* 1: algorithm can't converge in: glm.fit(x = X, y = Y, weights = weight...

Dear R users, I have a data with 1000 variables named "x1", "x2", ..., "x1000", and I want to construct a formula like this format: ~x1+x2+...+x1000+x1:x2+x1:x3+x999:x1000+log(x1)+...+log(x1000) That is: the base variables followed by all interaction terms and all base feature log-transformations. I know I can use several paste functions to construct it. But is

...aNew, function(x) dimnames(x)[[2]][-1]) <- as.roman(1:9)[-6] : could not find function "lapply<-" > lapply(LD_strataNew,function(x) dimnames(x)[[2]]) $`1996` [1] "lgdcm" "X1" "X2" "X3" "X4" "X5" "X7" "X8" "X9" $`1997` [1] "lgdcm" "X1" "X2" "X3" "X4" "X5" "X7" "X8" "X9" $`1998` [1] "lgdcm" "X1" "X2" "X3&quo...

...<-2*sin(pi*x1)*1.5+exp(2*x2)/3+2 * sin(4 * pi * (x3 - 0.2) *(x4 - 0.7)) } #the dataset nsample<-40 #sample size x1.tot<-runif(nsample,0,1) x2.tot<-runif(nsample,0,1) x3.tot<-runif(nsample,0,1) x4.tot<-runif(nsample,0,1) x5.tot<-runif(nsample,0,1) x6.tot<-runif(nsample,0,1) x7.tot<-runif(nsample,0,1) pnoise<-0.2 eta<-f2(x1.tot,x2.tot,x3.tot,x4.tot) y.tot<-eta+pnoise*rnorm(nsample,0,1) d<-data.frame(y.tot,x1.tot,x2.tot,x3.tot,x4.tot,x5.tot,x6.tot,x7.tot) nk2<-5 # the full model that contains the interactions of all pairs of x1~x7, 21 terms in total fr...

Hi, I want an efficient way to implement function pow in LLVM instead of invoking pow() math built-in. For algorithm part, I am clear for the logic. But I am not quite sure for which parts of LLVM should I replace built-in pow with another efficient pow implementation. Any comments and feedback are appreciated. Thanks! -- Wei Ding -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was

...> > In R-Studio with MS R Open 3.4: > > library(bootStepAIC) > > #Fake data > n<-200 > > x1 <- runif(n, -3, 3) > x2 <- runif(n, -3, 3) > x3 <- runif(n, -3, 3) > x4 <- runif(n, -3, 3) > x5 <- runif(n, -3, 3) > x6 <- runif(n, -3, 3) > x7 <- runif(n, -3, 3) > x8 <- runif(n, -3, 3) > y1 <- 42+x3 + 2*x6 + 3*x8 + runif(n, -0.5, 0.5) > > dat <- data.frame(x1,x2,x3,x4,x5,x6,x7,x8,y1) > #the real data won't have these names... > > cn <- names(dat) > trg <- "y1" > xvars <- cn[cn...