similar to: 4^2 factorial help

Dear all, I'm using R 2.8.1 under Windows Vista on a dual core 2,4 GhZ with 4 GB of RAM. I'm trying to reproduce a result out of "Analysis of Financial Time Series" by Ruey Tsay. In R I'm using the fGarch library. After fitting a ar(3)-garch(1,1)-model > model<-garchFit(~arma(3,0)+garch(1,1), analyse) I'm saving the results via > result<-model

LLVMers, The 2.2 prerelease is now available for testing: http://llvm.org/prereleases/2.2/ If anyone can help test this release, I ask that you do the following: 1) Build llvm and llvm-gcc (or use a binary). You may build release (default) or debug. You may pick llvm-gcc-4.0, llvm-gcc-4.2, or both. 2) Run 'make check'. 3) In llvm-test, run 'make TEST=nightly report'. 4) When

Dear Dr.Goslee and anyone may intrested in matrix manipulate, I am using your ecodist to do mantel and partial mantel test, I have locality data and shape variation data, and the two distance matrixs are given as belowings. When I run the analysis, it is always report that the matrix is not square, but I didn't know what's wrong with my data. Would you please help me on this. I am quite

Target: FreeBSD 6.2-STABLE on i386 autoconf says: configure:2122: checking build system type configure:2140: result: i386-unknown-freebsd6.2 [...] configure:2721: gcc -v >&5 Using built-in specs. Configured with: FreeBSD/i386 system compiler Thread model: posix gcc version 3.4.6 [FreeBSD] 20060305 [...] objdir != srcdir, for both llvm and gcc. Release build. llvm-gcc 4.2 from source.

Hello at all, working with a dataset I try to optimize a non-linear function with constraint. test<-read.csv2("C:/Users/Herb/Desktop/Opti/NORM.csv") fkt<- function(x){ a<-c(0) s<-c(0) #Minimizing square error for(j in 1:107){ s<-(test[j,2] - (x[1] * test[j,3]) - (x[2] * test[j,4]) - (x[3]*test[j,5]) - (x[4]*test[j,6]) - (x[5]*test[j,7]))^2 a<- a+s} a<-as.double(a)

On 23.11.2012, at 15:12, john skaller <skaller at users.sourceforge.net> wrote: > > On 23/11/2012, at 5:46 PM, Sean Silva wrote: > >> Adding LLVMdev, since this is intimately related to the optimization passes. >> >>> I think this is roughly because some function level optimisations are >>> worse than O(N) in the number of instructions. >>

On Fri, Sep 14, 2007 at 11:42:18PM -0700, Tanya Lattner wrote: > The 2.1 pre-release (version 1) is available for testing: > http://llvm.org/prereleases/2.1/version1/ > > [...] > > 2) Download llvm-2.1, llvm-test-2.1, and the llvm-gcc4.0 source. > Compile everything. Run "make check" and the full llvm-test suite > (make TEST=nightly report). > > Send

Target: FreeBSD 7.0-RC1 on amd64. autoconf says: configure:2122: checking build system type configure:2140: result: x86_64-unknown-freebsd7.0 [...] configure:2721: gcc -v >&5 Using built-in specs. Target: amd64-undermydesk-freebsd Configured with: FreeBSD/amd64 system compiler Thread model: posix gcc version 4.2.1 20070719 [FreeBSD] [...] objdir != srcdir, for both llvm and gcc. Release

I'm using caret to assess classifier performance (and it's great!). However, I've found that my results differ between R2.* and R3.* - reported accuracies are reduced dramatically. I suspect that a code change to kernlab ksvm may be responsible (see version 5.16-24 here: http://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/caret/news.html). I get very different results between caret_5.15-61 +

Hello~   Did any one have used the package 'orcutt' ?   I find that it can not work smoothly in a single variable regression. I use the example following, it function very well.   But when I regress "cons" on "price" (use the "reg1<-lm(cons~price+income+temp)") , then  use "reg11<-cochrane.orcutt(reg1) ". There is an error message “Error in

I'm running some GEE models but when I request the summary(pcb.gee) all I get are rows and rows of intercorelations and they fill up the screen buffer so I can not even scroll back to see what else might be in the summary. How do I get the summary function to NOT print the intercorrelations? Thanks, -- Dean Sonneborn Programmer Analyst Department of Public Health Sciences University of

Dear R-tisans, I am trying to calculate the 12th root of a transition (square) matrix, but can't seem to obtain an accurate result. I realize that this post is laced with intimations of quantitative finance, but the question is both R-related and broadly mathematical. That said, I'm happy to post this to R-SIG-Finance if I've erred in posting this to the general list. I've

Hi Experts, I am new to R, and was wondering how to do 3D linear regression in R. In other words, I need to Fit a 3-Dimensional Line to Data Points (input). I googled before posting this, and found that it is possible in Matlab and other commercial packages. For example, see the Matlab link:

As I am reading ?arima, only NA entries in the argument fixed= imports. The following seems to indicate otherwise: x <- arima.sim(model=list(ar=0.8), n=100) + (1:100)/50 > t <- 1:100 > mod1 <- lm(x ~ t) > > init1 <- c(0, coef(mod1)[2]) > fixed1 <- c(as.numeric(NA), 0) > > arima(x, order=c(1,0,0), xreg=t, include.mean=FALSE, init=init1, fixed=fixed1)

Greetings everyone, I'm trying to add a specific table or a specific number of rows (e.g.44) to a table with no success. This is my basic table > head(dataA) year plot spp prop.B DCA1 DCA2 DCA3 DCA4 1 2000 1 a1 0.031079 -0.0776 -0.0009 0.0259 -0.0457 2 2000 1 a2 0.968921 -0.0448 0.1479 -0.1343 0.1670 3 2000 2 a1 0.029218

To compare two different models, I've compared the result of using dropterm() on both. Single term deletions Model: growth ~ days + I(days^0.5) Df Sum of Sq RSS AIC <none> 2.8750 -0.2290 days 1 4.8594 7.7344 4.6984 I(days^0.5) 1 0.0234 2.8984 -2.1722 AND Single term deletions Model: growth ~ days + I(days^2) Df Sum

Dear colleagues, I'm conducting a meta-analysis of studies evaluating adherence of HIV-positive drug users into AIDS treatment, therefore I'm looking for some advice and syntax suggestion for running the meta-regression using proportions, not the usual OR/RR frequently used on RCT studies. Have already searched already several handbooks, R-manuals, mailing lists, professors, but... not

LLVMers, The 2.1 pre-release (version 1) is available for testing: http://llvm.org/prereleases/2.1/version1/ I'm looking for members of the LLVM community to test the 2.1 release. There are 2 ways you can help: 1) Download llvm-2.1, llvm-test-2.1, and the appropriate llvm-gcc4.0 binary. Run "make check" and the full llvm-test suite (make TEST=nightly report). 2) Download

Hi everyone, I'm witnessing an odd modelling phenomenon that I can't explain. If anyone has seen this before, or can explain what's going on would let me know, I'd be very grateful! Especially if I'm just being dim. I'm fitting a pair of continuous variates and their interaction to some residuals from another model. The sequential anova statement changes with the term

Hi, I have a problem with Kolmogorov-Smirnov test fit. I try fit distribution to my data. Actualy I create two test: - # First Kolmogorov-Smirnov Tests fit - # Second Kolmogorov-Smirnov Tests fit see below. This two test return difrent result and i don't know which is properly. Which result is properly? The first test return lower D = 0.0234 and lower p-value = 0.00304. The lower 'D'