similar to: Help with optimization problem

Hi All, I've encountered an issue where tail merging MIs is causing a problem with the post-RA MI scheduler dependency analysis and I'm not sure of the best way to address the problem. In my case, the branch folding pass (lib/CodeGen/BranchFolding.cpp) is merging common code from BB#14 and BB#15 into BB#16. It's clear that there are 4 common instructions (marked with an *) in BB#14

Dear R-helpers, I am struggling with an optimization problem at the moment and decided to write the list looking for some help. I will use a very small example to explain what I would like to. Thanks in advance for your help. We would like to distribute resources from 4 warehouses to 3 destinations. The costs associated are as follows: Destination >From 1 2 3 Total

SImplify your call to lm using the "." argument instead of manipulating formulas. > strt <- lm(y1 ~ ., data = dat) and you do not need to explicitly specify the "1+" on the rhs for lm, so > frm2<-as.formula(paste(trg," ~ ", paste(xvars,collapse = "+"))) works fine, too. Anyway, doing this gives (but see end of output)" bst <-

Dear R users/developers I requested help to solve the problem of formulating Multivariate Sample selection model by using Full Information Maximum Likelihood (FIML)estimation method. I could not get any response. I formulated the following code of FIML to analyse univariate sample selection problem. Would you please advise me where is my problem library (sem) library(nrmlepln) Selection

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

On Wed, 5 Oct 2005 Hallgeir.Grinde 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 <-

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 to the

Dette er en melding med flere deler i MIME-format. --=_alternative 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 <-

Dear R-List, (I am not sure whether this list is the right place for my question...) I have a dataframe df.cfa

> From: Peter Dalgaard > > Hallgeir.Grinde at elkem.no writes: > > > Dette er en melding med flere deler i MIME-format. > > --=_alternative 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)

Hi, Using S=1000 and simdata <- replicate(S, generate(3000)) #If you want both "m1" and "m0" #here the missing values are 0 res1<-sapply(seq_len(ncol(simdata.psm1)),function(i) {x1<-merge(simdata.psm0[,i],simdata.psm1[,i],all=TRUE); x1[is.na(x1)]<-0; x1}) res1[,997:1000] #????? [,1]???????? [,2]???????? [,3]???????? [,4]??????? #x1??? Numeric,3000 Numeric,3000

Hi, I wonder if anyone can help me with this issue. I am using R2BayesX. It seems that the model can maximally contain 20 interactions. When the number of interaction terms exceed 20, the code stops working. Here is a piece of toy code. rm(list=ls()) library(BayesX) library(R2BayesX) #data generating model f2<-function(x1,x2,x3,x4) { y<-2*sin(pi*x1)*1.5+exp(2*x2)/3+2 * sin(4 * pi * (x3

I'm using specify.model for the sem package. I can't figure out how to represent the residual errors for the observed variables for a CFA model. (Once I get this working I need to add some further constraints.) Here is what I've tried: model.sa <- specify.model() F1 -> X1,l11, NA F1 -> X2,l21, NA F1 -> X3,l31, NA F1 -> X4,l41, NA F1 -> X5, NA, 0.20

Hi, Jiong, Thanks for the patch! It is a great start to support 32bit register in BPF. In the past, I have studied a little bit to see whether 32bit register support may reduce the number of unnecessary shifts on x86_64 and improve the performance. Looking through a few bpf programs and it looks like the opportunity is not great, but still nice to have if we have this capability. As you

Dear R-list, I'm not sure what I've found about a function in DAAG package is a bug. When I was using cv.lm(DAAG) , I found there might be something wrong with it. The problem is that we can't use it to deal with a linear model with more than one predictor variable. But the usage documentation hasn't informed us about this. The code illustrates my discovery: > library(DAAG)

#### I checked through every 3 factor * 3 loading case. #### While, 4 factor * 3 loading failed. #### the data is 6 factor * 3 loading require(sem); cor18<-read.moments(); 1 .68 1 .60 .58 1 .01 .10 .07 1 .12 .04 .06 .29 1 .06 .06 .01 .35 .24 1 .09 .13 .10 .05 .03 .07 1 .04 .08 .16 .10 .12 .06 .25 1 .06 .09 .02 .02 .09 .16 .29 .36 1 .23 .26 .19 .05 .04 .04 .08 .09 .09 1 .11 .13 .12 .03 .05 .03

Yo copio y pego este código y me sale correctamente. Se me ocurre que pueda deberse a la versión de R ¿cuál usas? El 10/09/2020 a las 17:51, Samura . escribió: > Gracias por las respuestas. > > Probé lo de hacer la función y no me salía. Pensaba que hacía algo mal. > Ahora con el código de Marcelino tampoco me sale. > > col1 <- c('x1', 'x2', 'x11',

Dear R-List, I tried to fit a partial credit model using the "pcmdat" from eRm-package comparing the results of mirt, eRm, ltm and winsteps. The results where quite different, though. I cannot figure out what went wrong and I do not know which result I can rely on. This is what I did in R library(mirt) #load(file="u3.RData")

Dear R experts/ users Full Information Maximum Likelihood (FIML) estimation approach is considered robust over Seemingly Unrelated Regression (SUR) approach for analysing data of multivariate sample selection problem. The zero cases in my dependent variables are resulted from three sources: Irreverent options, not choosing due to negative utility and not used in the reported time. FIML can

Is there a way to apply paste to?list(form1 = EQ1, form2 = EQ2, form3 = EQ3, form4 = EQ4)?such that I don't have to write form1=EQ1 for all my models?(I might have a list of 20 or more)? I also need the EQs to read the formulas associated with them. For example, below, I was able to automate the name assignment but I could not figure out how to?to set up the list using?paste or other