similar to: Help finding source of warnings

>>>>> Prof J C Nash (U30A) writes: > I've been implementing a wrapper to the 2011 Fortran version of > L-BFGS-B. In optim(), R uses a C translation of a Fortran version (the > version number does not appear to be documented by the original > authors). The authors of the original Fortran code have updated it and > published the reasons in ACM TOMS due to

> On 25 Apr 2015, at 13:11 , Prof J C Nash (U30A) <nashjc at uottawa.ca> wrote: > > Hendrik pointed out it was the parentheses that gave the complaint. > Single quotes and no parentheses seem to satisfy R CMD check. Perhaps > that needs to be in the WRE. Well, it is in ?toTitleCase: ...However, unknown technical terms will be capitalized unless they are single

On 24.04.2015 22:44, Ben Bolker wrote: > Prof J C Nash (U30A <nashjc <at> uottawa.ca> writes: > >> >> I was preparing a fix for a minor glitch in my optimx package and R CMD >> check gave an error that the title was not in title case. > > [snip] to make Gmane happy ... > >> I have found >> >> A Replacement and Extension of the

x1<-c(5.548,4.896,1.964,3.586,3.824,3.111,3.607,3.557,2.989,18.053,3.773,1.253,2.094,2.726,1.758,5.011,2.455,0.913,0.890,2.468,4.168,4.810,34.319,1.531,1.481,2.239,4.204,3.463,1.727) y<-c(2.590,3.770,1.270,1.445,3.290,0.930,1.600,1.250,3.450,1.096,1.745,1.060,0.890,2.755,1.515,4.770,2.220,0.590,0.530,1.910,4.010,1.745,1.965,2.555,0.770,0.720,1.730,2.860,0.760)

Thanks Brian. Indeed, the vignette is in markdown form. When I updated my system to R 3.1.3 I ran update.packages() and this seems to have upset things (including R-studio processing of markdown files). I tried removing rmarkdown and reverting to an older version so that my sessionInfo() is Loading required package: rmarkdown > sessionInfo() R version 3.1.3 (2015-03-09) Platform:

Are other developers finding R 3.1.3 problematic because vignette building requires pandoc 1.12.3, while Linux Mint 17 / Ubuntu 14.04 have 1.12.2.1? R 3.1.2 seems to work fine. I'd very much like to avoid having to build as large a Linux package as pandoc, which has given me issues outside of R (it leaves out words, sentences or paragraphs when converting Latex to epub in a novel I'm

Hello everyone, I've spent the last 2 days trying to install base R on my Ubuntu 14.04 LTS machine. I even just wiped my entire computer and reinstalled the operating system thinking that was the problem (since some people have problems updating R). So far I've tried to follow this link exactly that has instructions: http://mirror.las.iastate.edu/CRAN/ Since I just reinstalled Ubuntu I

I noted Duncan's comment that an answer had been provided, and went to the archives to find his earlier comment, which I am fairly sure I saw a day or two ago. However, neither May nor June archives show Duncan in the thread except for the msg below (edited for space). Possibly tech failures are causing misunderstandings. JN On 14-06-02 06:00 AM, r-devel-request at r-project.org wrote: >

I was preparing a fix for a minor glitch in my optimx package and R CMD check gave an error that the title was not in title case. It is A Replacement and Extension of the optim() Function R CMD check suggests the incorrect form A Replacement and Extension of the Optim() Function 'Writing R Extensions' suggests single quotes, i.e., A Replacement and Extension of the 'optim()'

Hi, dear R users I am a newbie in R and I wantto use the method of meximum likelihood to fit a Weibull distribution to my survival data. I use "optim" as follows: optim(c(1, 0.25),weibull.like,mydata=mydata,method="L-BFGS-B",hessian = TRUE) My question is: how do I setup the constraints so that the two parametrs of Weibull to be pisotive? Or should I use other function

As the original coder (in mid 1970s) of BFGS, CG and Nelder-Mead in optim(), I've been pushing for some time for their deprecation. They aren't "bad", but we have better tools, and they are in CRAN packages. Similarly, I believe other optimization tools in the core (optim::L-BFGS-B, nlm, nlminb) can and should be moved to packages (there are already 2 versions at least of LBFGS

Hi. I just noticed the paper by Morales and Nocedal Remark on "Algorithm 778: L-BFGS-B: Fortran Subroutines for Large-Scale Bound Constrained Optimization". TOMS 2011; 38(1): 7 http://www.ece.northwestern.edu/~morales/PSfiles/acm-remark.pdf which describes a couple of improvements (speed and accuracy) to the original Netlib code which AFAICT is that still used by optim() via f2c.

> Date: Tue, 2 Apr 2013 06:59:13 -0500 > From: Paul Johnson <pauljohn32 at gmail.com> > To: qi A <send2aqi at gmail.com> > Cc: R-help <r-help at r-project.org> > Subject: Re: [R] DUD (Does not Use Derivatives) for nonlinear > regression in R? > Message-ID: > <CAErODj_1pK8raHyAme_2Wt5zQZ_HqOhRjQ62bChhkORWbW=o2A at mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type:

Recently I reported a small bug in optim's SANN method failing to report that it had exceeded the maximum function evaluation limit in the convergence code. This is a small enough matter that I was reluctant to create a full-blown bug report. Indeed in the optimx package Ravi Varadhan and I have been developing on r-forge (under the OptimizeR project) it was a minimal work around to fix

Having worked with optim() and related programs for years, it surprised me that I haven't noticed this before, but optim() is inconsistent in how it deals with bounds constraints specified at infinity. Here's an example: # optim-glitch-Ex.R x0<-c(1,2,3,4) fnt <- function(x, fscale=10){ yy <- length(x):1 val <- sum((yy*x)^2)*fscale } grt <- function(x, fscale=10){ nn

I have not included the previous postings because they came out very strangely on my mail reader. However, the question concerned the choice of minimizer for the zeroinfl() function, which apparently allows any of the current 6 methods of optim() for this purpose. The original poster wanted to use Newton-Raphson. Newton-Raphson (or just Newton for simplicity) is commonly thought to be the

Hi, It sometimes happens that some packages get included to R like for example the parallel package. I was wondering if there is a process to decide whether or not to include a package in the core implementation of R? For example, why not include the Rcpp package, which became for a lot of user the main tool to extend R? What is our view on the (not so well known) dotCall64 package which is an

However, trying this on Linux Mint gave package ?installr? is not available (for R version 3.4.2) Has the package not been updated yet? JN Try the installr package. It was designed for this purpose. On Fri, Nov 10, 2017 at 11:49 AM, Bond, Stephen <Stephen.Bond at cibc.com> wrote: > Is there a utility which will allow me to upgrade my R version and update all packages from the old

Ravi Varadhan and I have been looking at UCMINF to try to identify why it gives occasional (but not reproducible) errors, seemingly on Windows only. There is some suspicion that its use of DBLEPR for finessing the Fortran WRITE() statements may be to blame. While I can find DBLEPR in Venables and Ripley, it doesn't get much mention after about 2000 in the archives, though it is in the R FAQ

Ravi Varadhan and I have been looking at UCMINF to try to identify why it gives occasional (but not reproducible) errors, seemingly on Windows only. There is some suspicion that its use of DBLEPR for finessing the Fortran WRITE() statements may be to blame. While I can find DBLEPR in Venables and Ripley, it doesn't get much mention after about 2000 in the archives, though it is in the R FAQ