similar to: Cross-validation in R

Tonight I''ve been moving some of my personal data around on my desktop system and have hit some on-disk corruption. As you may know, I''m cursed, and so this had a high probability of ending badly. I have two SCSI disks and use live upgrade, and I have a partition, /aux0, where I tend to keep personal stuff. This is on an SB2500 running snv_46. The upshot is that I have a slice

Hello, I am looking at the job satisfaction data below, from a problem in Agresti's book, and I am not sure where the degrees of freedom come from. The way I am fitting a binomial model, I have 168 observations, so in my understanding that should also be the number of fitted parameters in the saturated model. Since I have one intercept parameter, I was thinking to get 167 df for the Null

I am using R 2.1.1 under Mac OS 10.3.9. Two related problems (see notes 1. and 2. below) are illustrated by results of the following: y <- rnorm(10) x <- z <- 1:10 is.na(x[9]) <- TRUE lm0 <- lm(y ~ 1) lm1 <- lm(y ~ 1, weights = rep(1, 10)) add1(lm0, scope = ~ x) ## works ok add1(lm1, scope = ~ x) ## error lm2 <- lm(y ~ 1, offset = 1:10) add1(lm0, scope = ~ z) ##

David, Thanks. The reason add1.lm (and drop1.lm) do not support offsets is that lm did not when they were written, and the person who added offsets to lm did not change them. (I do wish they had not added an offset arg and just used the formula as in S's glm.) That is easy to add. For the other point, some care is needed if 'x' is supplied and the upper scope reduces the number

Hi Folks, I''ve got a 3.9 Tb zpool, and it is casing kernel panics on my Solaris 10 280r (SPARC) server. The message I get on panic is this: panic[cpu1]/thread=2a100a95cc0: zfs: freeing free segment (offset=423713792 size=1024) This seems to come about when the zpool is being used or being scrubbed - about twice a day at the moment. After the reboot, the scrub seems to have