search for: zeroness

Hi, Dear R-help I know there are some R package to deal with zero-inflated count data. But I am now looking for R package to deal with zero-inflated continuous data. The response variable (Y) in my dataset contains a larger mount of zero and the Non-zero response are quite right skewed. Now what i am doing is first to use a logistic regression on covariates (X) to estimate the probability of Y

Am 10.04.2018 um 15:03 hat Nir Soffer geschrieben: > On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 1:44 PM Richard W.M. Jones <rjones@redhat.com> > wrote: > > > We now have true zeroing support in oVirt imageio, thanks for that. > > > > However a problem is that ‘qemu-img convert’ issues zero requests for > > the whole disk before starting the transfer. It does this using 32 MB

Folks, If I have a vector such as the following: x <- c(0, -1, -1, -1, 0, 0, 1, -1, 1, 0) and I want to replace the zeroes by the nearest non-zero number to the left, is there a more elegant way to do this than the following loop? y <- x for (i in 2 : length(x)) { if (y[i] == 0) { y[i] <- y[i - 1] } } > y [1] 0 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 1 -1 1 1 You can see the

Add coverage for the previous patch. Although most plugins don't change can_fua or can_fast_zero on the fly, the code should still not abort when calling .zero with a flag that was permitted by the previous open but not permitted by the current open. Signed-off-by: Eric Blake <eblake@redhat.com> --- tests/Makefile.am | 2 + tests/test-retry-zero-flags.sh | 126

Hello Imagine I have a vector with ones and zeroes I write it compactly: 1111111100001111111111110000000001111111111100101 I need to get a new vector replacing the "N" ones following the zeroes to new zeroes. For example for N = 3 1111111100001111111111110000000001111111111100101 becomes 1111111100000001111111110000000000001111111100000 I can do it with a for loop but I've read

Hi, I recently updated to R 3.0.1. I'm running linux ubuntu 12.04. I realized that I have to update all the installed packages so I run > update.packages(checkBuilt=TRUE) as described here http://www.r-bloggers.com/r-3-0-0-is-released-whats-new-and-how-to-upgrade/ . The first thing it did was telling me that it will not update several packages. When it was finished I used the warnings

On 2/17/20 9:13 AM, Max Reitz wrote: > Hi, > > It’s my understanding that without some is_zero infrastructure for QEMU, > it’s impossible to implement this flag in qemu’s NBD server. You're right that we may need some more infrastructure before being able to decide when to report this bit in all cases. But for raw files, that infrastructure already exists: does block_status at

On 04/10/2018 09:07 AM, Nir Soffer wrote: > On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 4:48 PM Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com> wrote: > >> Am 10.04.2018 um 15:03 hat Nir Soffer geschrieben: >>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 1:44 PM Richard W.M. Jones <rjones@redhat.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> We now have true zeroing support in oVirt imageio, thanks for that.

Hi everyone, I have a matrix that has a combination of zeros and NAs. When I perform certain calculations on the matrix, the zeros generate "Inf" values. Is there a way to either convert the zeros in the matrix to NAs, or only perform the calculations if not zero (i.e. like using something similar to an !all(is.na() construct)? Thanks, rcoder -- View this message in context:

Hi All, APFloat::fusedMultiplyAdd currently computes the wrong signed zero when small negative results are truncated back to zero in standard precision. The following snippet handles the signedness in fusedMultiplyAdd: /* If two numbers add (exactly) to zero, IEEE 754 decrees it is a positive zero unless rounding to minus infinity, except that adding two like-signed zeroes gives that

Hello, everyone, There's a problem about zero in R and I really need your help. I have a vector shown as x=c(0.1819711,0.4811463,0.1935151,0.1433675), The sum of this vector is shown as 1 in R, but when I type 1-sum(x), the value is not zero, but -2.220446e-16. I can accept that this value is quite small and could be seen as zero, but there would be a problem when it's not really

> -----Original Message----- > From: Stefan Hajnoczi [mailto:stefanha at redhat.com] > Sent: Thursday, June 7, 2018 9:10 PM > To: Liu, Changpeng <changpeng.liu at intel.com> > Cc: virtualization at lists.linux-foundation.org; cavery at redhat.com; > jasowang at redhat.com; pbonzini at redhat.com; Wang, Wei W > <wei.w.wang at intel.com> > Subject: Re: [PATCH v6]

> -----Original Message----- > From: Stefan Hajnoczi [mailto:stefanha at redhat.com] > Sent: Thursday, June 7, 2018 9:10 PM > To: Liu, Changpeng <changpeng.liu at intel.com> > Cc: virtualization at lists.linux-foundation.org; cavery at redhat.com; > jasowang at redhat.com; pbonzini at redhat.com; Wang, Wei W > <wei.w.wang at intel.com> > Subject: Re: [PATCH v6]

I am trying to set up a function which processes my data according to the following rules: 1. if (x[i]==0) NA 2. if (x[i]>0) log(x[i]/(number of consecutive zeros immediately preceding it +1)) The data this will apply to include a variety of whole numbers not limited to 1 & 0, a number of which may appear consecutively and not separated by zeros. Below is an example with a detailed

On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 02:07:33PM +0000, Nir Soffer wrote: > This makes sense if the device is backed by a block device on oVirt side, > and the NBD support efficient zeroing. But in this case the device is backed > by an empty sparse file on NFS, and oVirt does not support yet efficient > zeroing, we just write zeros manually. > > I think should be handled on virt-v2v plugin

Hi Mehdi, Thanks for the feedback. I think the comment is fine - the problem is just that the original conditional didn't exactly match it. With the addition of the underflow check I believe the condition now matches the comment: The sign is only tweaked if the result of the addition is exactly zero, rather than a small result that truncates to zero. CC'ing llvm-commits, where this email

Dear R Staff You can see my data.csv file in the annex. I try to count non-zero values in dataset but I need to exclude NA in this calculation My code is very long (following), How can I write this code more efficiently and shortly? ## [NA_Count] - Find NA values data.na =sapply(data[,3:ncol(data)], function(c) sum(length(which(is.na (c))))) ## [Zero] - Find zero values

On 15/07/2017 11:33 AM, Anthony Damico wrote: > hi, i realized that the segfault happens on the text file in a new R > session. so, creating the segfault-generating text file requires a > contributed package, but prompting the actual segfault does not -- > pretty sure that means this is a base R bug? submitted here: > https://bugs.r-project.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=17311

> -----Original Message----- > From: Stefan Hajnoczi [mailto:stefanha at redhat.com] > Sent: Friday, June 8, 2018 6:20 PM > To: Liu, Changpeng <changpeng.liu at intel.com> > Cc: virtualization at lists.linux-foundation.org; cavery at redhat.com; > jasowang at redhat.com; pbonzini at redhat.com; Wang, Wei W > <wei.w.wang at intel.com> > Subject: Re: [PATCH v6]

This is a cover letter to a series of patches being proposed in tandem to four different projects: - nbd: Document a new NBD_CMD_FLAG_FAST_ZERO command flag - qemu: Implement the flag for both clients and server - libnbd: Implement the flag for clients - nbdkit: Implement the flag for servers, including the nbd passthrough client If you want to test the patches together, I've pushed a