similar to: obtener residuos de una Anova con biblioteca CAR

Buen dia!! Pues me encuentro trabajando con un conjunto de datos simulados que se ajustan a un modelo Ar(1) y pues queria saber si existe un comando para realizarle una prueba de homocedasticidad, pues la prueba que hay en el R es la bartlett.test pero pues no estoy muy seguro para usarla. Gracias [[alternative HTML version deleted]]

Hi Hal, >> 4. To fix this, I think that additional fast-math-flags are likely >> needed in the IR. Instead of the following set: >> >> 'nnan' + 'ninf' + 'nsz' + 'arcp' + 'contract' >> >> something like this: >> >> 'reassoc' + 'libm' + 'nnan' + 'ninf' + 'nsz' +

??Gracias Javier,? 2017-04-01 12:07 GMT-03:00 <javier.ruben.marcuzzi en gmail.com>: > Mi duda es la siguiente, la varianza residual en su modelo, es homogénea o > heterogénea, ?La varianza es homogénea, común a todas las observaciones. Digamos que el modelo es el siguiente, y=f(x, betas)+e con f alguna función no lineal cuyos parámetros son betas y con e~N(0, sigma2). Uno suele

hola soy nuevo usuario de R y necesito crear un objeto p tal que, p=lambda*integral[f´´(x)^2 dx ] donde "lambda" es uno de los parametros que resultan de la funcion "smooth.spline()" y la integral es sobre la derivada 2 de esa misma funcion... dos cuestiones: 1) como extraigo lambda de los resultados de smooth.spline() para usarlo como objeto cuando lo requiera y 2) como

Hola!! A ver si alguien puede ayudarme!! Para ajuste de modelos lineales normalmente uso Gretl. Ahora estoy empezando a hacerlo en R. Me gustaría saber si existe alguna función que haga un summary extendido como el de Gretl. Os pongo un ejemplo del summary de Gretl. Modelo 1: MCO, usando las observaciones 1968-1982 (T = 15) Variable dependiente: Invest              Coeficiente   Desv. Típica

Buenos días; Estoy intentando aprender algo de sobre los modelos lineales mixtos. Estoy siguiendo el libro "Multilevlel analysis: techniques and applications" de Joop Hox. Estoy intentado reproducir las tablas y gráficos que trae el libro con el paquete lmer. En este libro se indica que en la comprobación de los supuestos del modelo hay que estudiar los gráficos de residuales tanto

Hi, Warren, Thanks for writing all of this up. In short, regarding your suggested solution: > 4. To fix this, I think that additional fast-math-flags are likely > needed in > > the IR. Instead of the following set: > > 'nnan' + 'ninf' + 'nsz' + 'arcp' + 'contract' > > something like this: > > 'reassoc' +

On 10/01/2017 06:05 PM, Sanjay Patel wrote: > Are we confident that we just need those 7 bits to represent all of > the relaxed FP states that we need/want to support? > > I'm asking because FMF in IR is currently mapped onto the > SubclassOptionalData of Value...and we have exactly 7 bits there. :) > > If we're redoing the definitions, I'm wondering if we can

Hola amigos, Supongamos que se quiere ejecutar un modelo no lineal con nls. Pensemos en el ejemplo de la ayuda: DNase1 <- subset(DNase, Run == 1) fm1DNase1 <- nls(density ~ SSlogis(log(conc), Asym, xmid, scal), DNase1) summary(fm1DNase1) Aquí se está modelando la densidad óptica de un ensayo relacionada de forma no lineal (logística) con (el logaritmo) de la concentración de una proteína.

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

I'm not aware of any additional bits needed. But putting us right at the edge leaves me uncomfortable. So an implementation that isn't limited by the 7 bits in SubclassOptionalData seems sensible. Thanks, -Warren From: Sanjay Patel [mailto:spatel at rotateright.com] Sent: Monday, October 2, 2017 12:06 AM To: Ristow, Warren Cc: Hal Finkel; llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org Subject: Re:

Hi, Thanks for the quick feedback. I see your points, but I have a few questions/comments. I'll start at the end of the previous post: > ... > I think these are valuable problems to solve, but you should tackle them piece by piece: > > 1) the clang part of overriding the individual FMF and emitting the right IR is the first thing to fix. > 2) the backend is still using the

Hola, ¿qué tal? Tengo una pregunta de esta

Just wanted to point out part of this even becoming a problem is the use of `isFast()`. There should be warnings against using isFast() and the existing code should be changed to query specific flags instead... - Matthias > On Feb 8, 2018, at 5:34 PM, Quentin Colombet via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > Hi, > > TL;DR > r317488 changed the way fast math

Buenos dias para todos, Estoy trabajando en una aplicación que involucra análisis de clusters. Básicamente el objetivo es determinar a qué cluster pertenece cada observación de una matriz de datos "mydata" y luego generar muestras aleatorias de los mismos datos para determinar la proporción de veces que cada observación es clasificada en el cluster k. Este tipo de análisis es muy común

Does the language reference need to be updated? http://llvm.org/docs/LangRef.html#fast-math-flags It still mentions "fast" On Thu, Feb 8, 2018 at 8:34 PM, Quentin Colombet via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > Hi, > > TL;DR > r317488 changed the way fast math flags are laid out in the bitcode and > anyone compiling a pre-llvm-6.0 bitcode with

I don’t really like the idea of updating checks of UnsafeAlgebra() to depend on all of the other flags. It seems like it would be preferable to look at each optimization and figure out which flags it actually requires. I suspect that in many cases the “new” flag (i.e. allowing reassociation, etc.) will be what is actually needed anyway. I would be inclined to agree with Niolai’s suggestion of

2018-02-08 17:34 GMT-08:00 Quentin Colombet via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>: > Hi, > > TL;DR > r317488 changed the way fast math flags are laid out in the bitcode and > anyone compiling a pre-llvm-6.0 bitcode with llvm-6.0 will lose all the > optimizations guarded by isFast and a pre-llvm-6.0 compiler compiling a > llvm-6.0 bitcode will potentially generate

Hi, TL;DR r317488 changed the way fast math flags are laid out in the bitcode and anyone compiling a pre-llvm-6.0 bitcode with llvm-6.0 will lose all the optimizations guarded by isFast and a pre-llvm-6.0 compiler compiling a llvm-6.0 bitcode will potentially generate incorrect code w.r.t. fast math expectations. Should we bump the bitcode version because of that and have the autoupgrader

Hi all, I am using the function "plotCI" with the following command: plotCI(m.residuos.p.2 [1:41],li=m.residuos.p.3 [1:41],ui=m.residuos.p.4 [1:41],lty=1,ylab="") This generates exactly what I want except for the fact that I wanna drawn a line linking the points (m.residuos). How could I do that? Thanks a lot in advance, Caio [[alternative HTML version deleted]]