similar to: Graphics Reciprocal labeling

I believe that this may be more appropriate here in r-devel than in r-help. The normal hazard function, or reciprocal Mill's Ratio, may be obtained in R as dnorm(z)/(1 - pnorm(z)) or, better, as dnorm(z)/pnorm(-z) for small values of z. The latter formula breaks dowm numerically for me (running R 2.4.1 under Windows XP 5.1 SP 2) for values of z near 37.4 or greater. Looking at the pnorm

Hi, In relaxed/fast math mode, if we can convert a/b to a * (1/b), we may get more performance when (1) "b" is loop invariant or (2) arch has faster reciprocal instruction (e.g. recipe/recips on ARM) or (3) arch has no vector div, but has vector mul and recip. So ,with this node type, a div node can be converted to a mul and a recip when desired. Then, each arch can further

Hi folks, I know, this is a fairly common question and I am really disappointed that I could not find a solution. I am trying to calculate Mahanalobis distances in a data frame, where I have several hundreds groups and several hundreds of variables. Whatever I do, however I subset it I get the "system is computationally singular: reciprocal condition number" error. I know what it means

--- On Thu, 9/20/12, Jim Grosbach <grosbach at apple.com> wrote: From: Jim Grosbach <grosbach at apple.com> Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] Proposal: New DAG node type for reciprocal operation To: "Weiming Zhao" <weimingz at codeaurora.org> Cc: llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu Date: Thursday, September 20, 2012, 3:32 PM Sounds like a reasonable fit for a target-specific DAG combine. I

Sounds like a reasonable fit for a target-specific DAG combine. I suspect a target specific node wouldn't be necessary and the patterns could be matched directly. -Jim On Sep 20, 2012, at 3:26 PM, Weiming Zhao <weimingz at codeaurora.org> wrote: > Hi, > > In relaxed/fast math mode, if we can convert a/b to a * (1/b), we may get more performance when (1) “b” is loop

Yes, what I mean is a target independent node in the ISD::NodeType enum. I already did the node transformation DAGCombiner and target-specific lowering in the first place. It worked. But introducing a specific node will make the logic more clear. For example, in ARM, FDIV is a scalar operation. So, after DAGCombiner and Vector Type legalize, vectorized FDIV has been expanded into scalar versions,

I get this error while computing partial correlation. *Error in solve.default(Szz) : system is computationally singular: reciprocal condition number = 4.90109e-18* Why is it?Can anyone give me some idea ,how do i get rid it it? This is the function i use for calculating partial correlation. pcor.mat <- function(x,y,z,method="p",na.rm=T){ x <- c(x) y <- c(y)

Hi All, This is my R-version information:--- > version _ platform i486-pc-linux-gnu arch i486 os linux-gnu system i486, linux-gnu status major 2 minor 7.1 year 2008 month 06 day 23 svn rev 45970 language R version.string R version 2.7.1 (2008-06-23) While calculating partial

Dear All: I am using lmer() {lme4} to analyze results from a reciprocal transplant experiment where the response variable is modeled as a function of two fixed effects and their interaction. Example data follow: #library(lme4) #library(gmodels)

Is it easy or difficult to label the abscissa of a scatter graph as 1/trueScaleValue at that point? -- View this message in context: http://r.789695.n4.nabble.com/labeling-abscissa-using-a-function-of-the-plotted-scale-tp4678075.html Sent from the R help mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

If I run "rsync -ruv <local> <remote>" twice, no files are copied the second time - as expected. However, if I follow "rsync -ruv <local> <remote>" with "rsync -ruv <remote> <local>", all files are copied from <remote> to <local>. I suspect this is because the timestamps of <remote> files are of when they were

On Thu, Aug 8, 2013 at 2:07 PM, Chad Rosier <chad.rosier at gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Aug 8, 2013 at 1:56 PM, Mark Lacey <mark.lacey at apple.com> wrote: > >> >> On Aug 8, 2013, at 9:56 AM, Jim Grosbach <grosbach at apple.com> wrote: >> >> Hi Chad, >> >> This is a great transform to do, but you’re right that it’s only safe >>

Hi all, In a mailing-list post last November: http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2016-November/107104.html I raised some concerns that having the IR-level fast-math-flag 'fast' act as an "umbrella" to implicitly turn on all the lower-level fast-math-flags, causes some fundamental problems. Those fundamental problems are related to situations where a user wants to

Hi uRsers, when inverting a 2 by 2 matrix using solve, I encountered a error message: solve.default(sigma, tol = 1e-07) : system is computationally singular: reciprocal condition number = 1.7671e-017 and then I test the determinant of this matrix: 6.341393e-06. In my program, I have a condition block that whether a matrix is invertible like this: if(det(sigma)<1e-7) return NULL;

On the plus side, I'm glad to see the conclusions of the last couple of posts. From Mehdi: > Hope this clarify where I see the direction going, and even if you don’t agree with my > reasoning, the conclusion should be satisfactory on your side :) I'd say that summarizes my thoughts on this well. And from Nicolai: > Right. I'm not fundamentally opposed to having these

Hi there, I would like to draw a scatter plot and fit a smooth line by loess. Below is the data. However, the curve line started from 0, which my "resid" list doesn't consist of 0 value. It returned some warnings which I don't know if this is the reason affecting such problem. Here I also attached the warning messages. Please let me know if there is a solution to fix this. Thank

>All that said, I think we (the company I work for, Sony) will have to implement support >for these switches. It comes down to GCC has these switches (e.g., -fno-reciprocal-math >and -fno-associative-math), and they do suppress the transformations for our customers. >They switch to Clang/LLVM, they use the same switches, and it doesn't "work". So as a >practical

> On Nov 17, 2016, at 1:44 PM, Mehdi Amini via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > >> >> On Nov 17, 2016, at 1:24 PM, Ristow, Warren <warren.ristow at sony.com> wrote: >> >> On the plus side, I'm glad to see the conclusions of the last couple of posts. >> >> From Mehdi: >> >>> Hope this clarify where I see the

Hi r-help forum, I have been collecting contact data (with proximity logger collars) between a few different species of animal. All animals wear the collars, and any contact between the animals should be detected and recorded by both collars. However, this isn't always the case and more contacts may be recorded on one collar of the two. This is fine, it depends on battery life and other

> On Nov 16, 2016, at 6:22 PM, Ristow, Warren <warren.ristow at sony.com> wrote: > > > ... except that Warren’s proposal that started this discussion seems to imply that he > > has a use case that requires reciprocals to be turned off separately. > > Just to close this loose end, yes I have a use case. > > Specifically, we have a customer that turns on