similar to: data lost in cv.tree?

Hi, I am trying to do multinomial regression using the glmnet package, but the following gives me an error (for no reason apparent to me): library(glmnet) cv.glmnet(x=matrix(c(1,2,3,4,5,6,1,2,3,4,5,6), nrow=6),y=as.factor(c(1,2,1,2,3,3)),family='multinomial',alpha=0.5, nfolds=2) The error i get is: Error in if (outlist$msg != "Unknown error") return(outlist) : argument is of

Dear list, given this formula: > fmla <- formula(y1 ~ spp1 + spp2 + spp3 + spp5) > fmla[[3]] spp1 + spp2 + spp3 + spp5 is this the intended behaviour of as.character: > as.character(fmla[[3]]) [1] "+" "spp1 + spp2 + spp3" "spp5" ? Where does the extra "+" come from? > as.character(fmla) [1] "~"

Olly Betts <olly at survex.com> wrote: > On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 09:06:59AM +0000, Eric Wong wrote: > > Going back to the "prioritizing aggregated DBs" thread from > > February 2020, I've got 390 Xapian shards for 130 public inboxes > > I want to search against(*). There's more on the horizon (we're > > expecting tens of thousands of public

Thanks a lot for help in advance. I am switching from matlab to R and I guess I need some time to get rolling. I was wondering why this code : > fit.0 <- lm( Response ~ 1, data = ds3) > step(fit.0,scope=list(upper=~.,lower=~1),data=ds3) Start: AIC= -32.66 Response ~ 1 Call: lm(formula = Response ~ 1, data = ds3) Coefficients: (Intercept) 1.301 is not working

(resent without HTML) On 07/14/2013 05:56 AM, Ramkumar Ramachandra wrote: > 1c54d77 (x86: partial unification of asm-x86/bitops.h, 2008-01-30) > changed a bunch of btrl/btsl instructions to btr/bts, with the following > justification: > > The inline assembly for the bit operations has been changed to remove > explicit sizing hints on the instructions, so the assembler will

All, Could anyone recommend a package that allows the user to constrain the coefficients from a multiple regression equation? I tried using the gl1ce function in lasso2, but couldn't get it to work. I created a contrived example to illustrate my starting point. data(cars) fmla <- formula(dist ~ speed) gl1c.E <- gl1ce(fmla, data = cars) gl1c.E gl1c.E <- gl1ce(fmla, data =

Hi everyone - I'm trying to do a forward stepwise regression (I've tried both step and stepAIC) inside of a function. I can do it outside the function with no problems (first example in code below). I can also do a backward stepwise regression inside a function (second example), but forward stepwise regression ( third example ) fails with the error: "Error in

On 07/14/2013 12:23 PM, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote: > (resent without HTML) > > On 07/14/2013 05:56 AM, Ramkumar Ramachandra wrote: >> 1c54d77 (x86: partial unification of asm-x86/bitops.h, 2008-01-30) >> changed a bunch of btrl/btsl instructions to btr/bts, with the following >> justification: >> >> The inline assembly for the bit operations has been

Linus Torvalds wrote: >> btrl $1, 0 >> btr $1, 0 >> btsl $1, 0 >> bts $1, 0 > > What the heck is that supposed to show? I was trying to show a reduced case where gas doesn't complain, but llvm-mc does. Try compiling this with llvm-mc, and you'll get: .text btrl $1, 0 in.s:2:1: error: ambiguous instructions require an

Hello, I am trying to "paste" together a formula to use in the mob function of party. This means the formula will be of the form y ~ x1+ ...+xM | z1+..zN. I am doing some preliminary fits of y ~ x1+ ...+xM, then want to add the conditional part of the equation using update(). Here's the test code: var1 <- 1:78 x1 <- paste("x", var1, sep="") f1 <-

1c54d77 (x86: partial unification of asm-x86/bitops.h, 2008-01-30) changed a bunch of btrl/btsl instructions to btr/bts, with the following justification: The inline assembly for the bit operations has been changed to remove explicit sizing hints on the instructions, so the assembler will pick the appropriate instruction forms depending on the architecture and the context. Unfortunately,

Greetings. I've written a convenience function for multicollinearity diagnosis. I'd like to report to the user the formula that is used in a regression. I get output like this: > mcDiagnose(m1) [1] "The following auxiliary models are being estimated and returned in a list:" [1] "`x1` ~ ." formula(fmla)() [1] "`x2` ~ ." I'd like to fill in the period

Also, please elaborate on why this is a good change. Because gas accepts it isn’t sufficient reason in and of itself. -Jim On Jul 10, 2013, at 1:18 PM, Eli Friedman <eli.friedman at gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 12:29 PM, Ramkumar Ramachandra > <artagnon at gmail.com> wrote: >> The instructions btr and bts are perfectly valid, and have existed since

Jim Grosbach wrote: > That does raise a clarifying question here. Is the code you’re interested in > using Intel or AT&T syntax? > > Also note that the question isn’t whether we should support the btr/bts > instructions. We absolutely must (and do). The question is whether we are > properly handling the un-suffixed mnemonic form of the assembly syntax. > > Perhaps you

http://www.cs.fsu.edu/~baker/devices/lxr/http/source/linux/arch/x86/include/asm/bitops.h#L68 Here is one example that I found. Are the inline assembly arguments ambiguous in size? -Jevin Sent from my mobile device. Typos are par for the course. On Jul 10, 2013, at 5:47 PM, Jim Grosbach <grosbach at apple.com> wrote: On Jul 10, 2013, at 2:30 PM, Eric Christopher <echristo at

Hi, I'm trying to compile half precision program for ARM, while it seems LLVM fails to automatically generate fused-multiply-add instructions for c += a * b. I'm wondering whether I did something wrong, if not, is it a missing feature that will be supported later? (I know there're fp16 FMLA intrinsics though) Test programs and outputs, $ clang -O3 -march=armv8.2-a+fp16fml

On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 12:29 PM, Ramkumar Ramachandra <artagnon at gmail.com> wrote: > The instructions btr and bts are perfectly valid, and have existed since > Intel 386. GNU as supports them fine. Unfortunately, LLVM does not > support them, and barfs with: > > error: ambiguous instructions require an explicit suffix > > Fix this problem by disambiguating it

I want use survfit() and basehaz() inside a function, but it doesn't work. Could you take a look at this problem. Thanks for your help. Following is my codes: library(survival) n <- 50 # total sample size nclust <- 5 # number of clusters clusters <- rep(1:nclust,each=n/nclust) beta0 <- c(1,2) set.seed(13) #generate phmm data set Z <- cbind(Z1=sample(0:1,n,replace=TRUE),

> On Jul 13, 2017, at 10:43 AM, Bert Gunter <bgunter.4567 at gmail.com> wrote: > > poly(NIR, degree = 2) will work if NIR is a matrix, not a data.frame. > The degree argument apparently *must* be explicitly named if NIR is > not a numeric vector. AFAICS, this is unclear or unstated in ?poly. I still get the same error with: library(pld) data(gasoline) gasTrain <-

Hallo, linux-btrfs, I''ve (once again) tried "add" and "delete". First, with 3 devices (partitions): mkfs.btrfs -d raid0 -m raid1 /dev/sdk1 /dev/sdl1 /dev/sdm1 Mounted (to /mnt/btr), filled with about 100 GByte data. Then btrfs device add /dev/sdj1 /mnt/btr results in # show Label: none uuid: 6bd7d4df-e133-47d1-9b19-3c7565428770 Total devices 4 FS bytes