similar to: shortest distance between two point pattern

Hi all, given this example #start a<-c(0,70,50,100,70,650,1300,6900,1780,4930,1120,700,190,940, 760,100,300,36270,5610,249680,1760,4040,164890,17230,75140,1870,22380,5890,2430) length(a) b<-c(0,0,10,30,50,440,1000,140,70,90,60,60,20,90,180,30,90, 3220,490,20790,290,740,5350,940,3910,0,640,850,260) length(b) out<-ks.test(log10(a+1),log10(b+1)) # max distance D

Dear all, I would like to draw a dendrogram and mark some parts/branches (by using "segments") including their labels. If I draw it without specifying the length of x axix, I am able to do that (as in My dendrogram 1 of the following codes). However, if I want to specify the x axix, I am not able to draw marking line (by using "segments") including labels (as in My dendrogram

Dear r-helpers, xx <- c(0.000, 0.210, 0.714, 0.514, 1.000, 0.190, 0.590, 0.152) yy <- c(0.000, 0.265, 0.256, 0.521, 0.538, 0.761, 0.821, 1.000) aa <- c(19, 19, 19, 21, 19, 21, 21, 21) x0 <- xx[c(1, 1, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 4, 4, 4, 5, 6, 6, 7)] y0 <- yy[c(1, 1, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 4, 4, 4, 5, 6, 6, 7)] x1 <- xx[c(2, 3, 3, 4, 6, 4, 5, 5, 6, 7, 7, 7, 8, 8)] y1 <- yy[c(2, 3, 3, 4, 6, 4, 5,

I was teaching new R users to make some fun graphs. I had some arrows examples worked up we came across a problem. The arrows function ignores 2nd and following elements of vectors given as code an angle. Would you please consider 1) allowing vectors for code and angle, or 2) returning an error or warning when user mistakenly supplies a vector for those parameters? When code like this is

Full_Name: Michael Hoffman Version: 2.1.0 OS: Linux (Fedora Core 3, kernel 2.6.11-1.14_FC3) Submission from: (NULL) (193.62.199.8) help(arrows) says: """ arrows(x0, y0, x1, y1, length = 0.25, angle = 30, code = 2, col = par("fg"), lty = NULL, lwd = par("lwd"), xpd = NULL) ... If 'code=2' an arrowhead is drawn at

I suggest a simple enhancement to segments() and arrows() to facilitate drawing horizontal and vertical segments -- set default values for the second x and y arguments equal to the first set. This is handy, especially when the expressions for coordinates are long. Compare: Segments: < function (x0, y0, x1 = x0, y1 = y0, col = par("fg"), lty = par("lty"), --- > function

Hi All, I generated 5000 samples using the following script test<- rnorm(5000,1000,100) test1 <- subset(test, subset=(test > 1100)) d <- density(test) plot(d, main="Density of production") abline(v=mean(test1) I wanted to do the following but faced difficulties 1. to shade or color (blue) the curve using the criterion that any

Hi, I have had some troubles using doubleYScale. No matter what I try, I cant manage to change the color of the y-axis in the end. I have to produce a black and white plot. There is also something I do not understand regarding fontfamilyj="serif" when using it in: strip=strip.custom() Maybe someone has a better idea for defining which line and dots belong to which y-axis when not using

Uwe Ligges suggested I post this on R-bugs as a wishlist item with a proposed patch. R considers zero-length arguments to segments() to be an error. I would like R to allow this and to return without an error. It occurs naturally in settings like valid <- c(FALSE, FALSE, FALSE) segments(x0[valid], y0[valid], x1[valid], y1[valid]) For what it may be worth, S-Plus does not consider

Hello dear members of R-help and R-core mailing list, I am not sure if this request is a "ticket" that should be filled somewhere outside the mailing list. If so, I apologize for not doing and would like to know where I should have filled it. And to the subject matter: I would like to use a command like this: plot(c(1,8), 1:2, type="n") polygon(1:7, c(2,1,2,NA,2,1,2),

Hello dear members of R-help and R-core mailing list, I am not sure if this request is a "ticket" that should be filled somewhere outside the mailing list. If so, I apologize for not doing and would like to know where I should have filled it. And to the subject matter: I would like to use a command like this: plot(c(1,8), 1:2, type="n") polygon(1:7, c(2,1,2,NA,2,1,2),

Hi, I am trying to plot odds ratios and the corresponding confidence intervals in horizontal segments. It would be ideal if the confidence interval segment can be drawn with little vertical bars at both ends. I have tried very hard to change the type of ends by using 'lend' arguments, but cannot make it. I even tried 'arrows()', but still failed. Following is the code I use:

i am trying to replicate the following graph using xyplot : attach(x) plot ( jitter(type), mortality, pch=16, xlim = c(0.25, 3.75)) lines ( c(1-0.375,1.375) , c ( median(mortality[type==1]), median(mortality[type==1])), lwd=5,col=2) lines ( c(2-0.375,2.375) , c ( median(mortality[type==2]), median(mortality[type==2])), lwd=5,col=2) lines ( c(3-0.375,3.375) , c ( median(mortality[type==3]),

Hi R experts, I'm trying to use nls() for a piecewise linear regression with the first slope constrained to 0. There are 10 data points and when it does converge the second slope is almost always over estimated for some reason. I have many sets of these 10-point datasets that I need to do. The following segment of code is an example, and sorry for the overly precise numbers, they are just

In the hypothetical example below, how do I add two segments() into the two panels, respectively? Say segments(x0=5, y0=10, x1=5, y1=20) on the left and segments(x0=15, y0=-10, x1=15, y1=-2) on the right? Many thanks in advance, Yuelin Li. ps. part of the code came from a solution given by Deepayan Sarkar. ------------------- library(lattice) set.seed(12345) x <- 0:20 y.male.obs <- - 1.2

The sifm object has a limit of 1024x1024 for its input size and 2048x2048 for its output. The code checking this was trying to be clever resulting in it seeing a surface of e.g 1024x256 being outside of the input size limit. This commit fixes this. Signed-off-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede at redhat.com> --- src/gallium/drivers/nouveau/nv30/nv30_transfer.c | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2

Why does R think these numbers ***are*** equal? In a somewhat bizarre set of circumstances I calculated x0 <- 0.03580067 x1 <- 0.03474075 y0 <- 0.4918823 y1 <- 0.4474461 dx <- x1 - x0 dy <- y1 - y0 xx <- (x0 + x1)/2 yy <- (y0 + y1)/2 chk <- yy*dx - xx*dy + x0*dy - y0*dx If you think about it ***very*** carefully ( :-) )

May I ask why you're doing 512x512 instead of 1024x1024? These are already scaled up coordinates, so 1024x1024 should work no? Or is it because of the seams on the edges? Do those not also appear with 512x512 or does it sample outside of the box? Separately, why not use this approach on nv40 as well? I can't imagine the blitter would be faster... does this result in lower quality? On

library(nlme) data(Phenobarb) na.include <- function(x)x phe1 <- nlme(conc~phenoModel(Subject, time, dose, lCl, lV), data = Phenobarb, fixed = lCl+lV~1, random= pdDiag(lCl+lV~1), start = c(-5,0), na.action = na.include, naPattern = ~!is.na(conc)) phe.ranef <- ranef(phe1,augFrame=TRUE) plot(phe.ranef, form=lCl~Wt+ApgarInd) [Error in max(length(x0),

We do not have a generic blitter on nv3x cards, so we must use the sifm object for color resolving. This commit divides the sources and dest surfaces in to tiles which match the constraints of the sifm object, so that color resolving will work properly on nv3x cards. Signed-off-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede at redhat.com> --- Changes in v2: -Use 1024x1024 blocks -Use the sifm on both nv3x