similar to: which alternative tests instead of AIC/BIC for choosing models

Hi, I am trying to create a scatterplot, coding each point to one of 5 populations. I was successful when I did this for one set of data, yet when I try plotting other data a blank plot appears (although the axes are labelled and I can fit the regression lines from each population). I have tried a variety of things to fix this but nothing seems to work. I can plot the points if I do not

Hi all, Our target does not have native support for 64-bit integers, so we rely on library calls for certain operations (like sdiv). We recently ran into a problem where these operations that are expanded to library calls aren't maintaining the proper ordering in relation to other chains in the DAG. The following snippet of a DAG demonstrates the problem. t0: ch = EntryToken t2:

> On Sep 13, 2017, at 9:03 PM, jin chuan see via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > Hi All, > > Thanks for the reply. I managed to identify and fixed a few errors in my implementation. > > However, there are a few errors that i am not sure what is it indicating. > For starters, i think i should explain what i am trying to achieve. > > I am

I am relatively new to R and object oriented programming. I have relied on SAS for most of my data analysis. I teach an introductory undergraduate forecasting course using the Diebold text and I am considering using R in addition to SAS and Eviews in the course. I work primarily with univariate or multivariate time series data. I am having a great deal of difficulty understanding and working with

Hi, I have a problem regarding sub-register definitions and LiveIntervals on our target. When a subregister is defined, other parts of the register are always left untouched - they are neither read or def:ed. It however seems that Codegen treats subregister definitions as somehow clobbering the whole register. The SSA-code looks like this after isel: (Reg0 and Reg1 are 16bit registers. Reg2,

On Jan 19, 2009, at 9:17 AM, Patrick Boettcher wrote: > Hi list, > > in our LLVM-based-project we are writing a backend for our > processor. The > architecture is a quite straight-forward RISC, but it does not have > hardware interlocks, i.e. data hazards involving memory access must be > resolved by the compiler, either by scheduling unrelated > instructions or >

Hi list, in our LLVM-based-project we are writing a backend for our processor. The architecture is a quite straight-forward RISC, but it does not have hardware interlocks, i.e. data hazards involving memory access must be resolved by the compiler, either by scheduling unrelated instructions or by inserting NOOPs into the load delay slots: ---- For example, code which looks like that: load

Dear R-users, I want to fit a linear model with Y as response variable and X a categorical variable (with 4 categories), with the aim of comparing the basal category of X (category=1) with category 4. Unfortunately, there is another categorical variable with 2 categories which interact with x and I have to include it, so my model is s "reg3: Y=x*x3". Using fit.contrast to make the

Dear Achim, R Users, What am I doing wrong in this example ? a<-zoo(rnorm(100),order.by=1:100) b<-lag(a) regr<-na.exclude(merge(a,b)) plot(regr) grangertest(regr[,1],regr[,2],3) > a<-zoo(rnorm(100),order.by=1:100) > b<-lag(a) > regr<-na.exclude(merge(a,b)) > plot(regr) > grangertest(regr[,1],regr[,2],3) Error in solve(vc[ovar, ovar]) : subscript out of bounds

Dear R users, I have a problem with multicollinearity in mixed models and I am using lmer in package lme4. From previous mailing list, I learn of a reply "http://www.mail-archive.com/r-help at stat.math.ethz.ch/msg38537.html" which states that if not for interpretation but just for prediction, multicollinearity does not matter much. However, I am using mixed model to interpret something,

Running llc with '-verify-machineinstrs' may tell you which instruction break the SSA form. Ruiling From: llvm-dev [mailto:llvm-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org] On Behalf Of jin chuan see via llvm-dev Sent: Monday, September 11, 2017 10:02 AM To: Matthias Braun <mbraun at apple.com> Cc: llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] Live Register Spilling Sorry about the

Dear R Users, I am attempting to use the strucchange package but get an error which is difficult to decipher. I get the following error with breakpoints: > bp<-breakpoints(regr[,1]~regr[,2]+regr[,3]) Error in my.RSS.table[as.character(i), 3:4] <- c(pot.index[opt], break.RSS[opt]) : nothing to replace with I was wondering if anyone has seen this issue before and off the top of

I'm writing a pass that looks at the operands of certain non-commutable instructions and swaps a couple of them if certain conditions exist (a register bank conflict in the instruction). If the conflict exists, I build a new instruction which has the 2nd and 3rd operands swapped (using BuildMI). Then I want to get rid of the original instruction. I had done some searching and found that

> Of course, and the point is that, for example, on x86_64, the zext here is free. I'm still trying to understand the problem... > > In the example you provided in your previous e-mail, we choose the solution: > > `GEP @Global, zext(V)` -> `GEP (@Global + zext VStart), {i64 0,+,1}` > `V` -> `trunc({i64 0,+,1}) + VStart` > > instead of the actually-better

We have a test that looks like this… define void @array16_store() { ; CHECK-LABEL: array16_store: ; CHECK: ldi [[REG1:r[0-9]+]], 204 ; CHECK: ldi [[REG2:r[0-9]+]], 170 ; CHECK: sts int.array+3, [[REG2]] ; CHECK: sts int.array+2, [[REG1]] ; CHECK: ldi [[REG1:r[0-9]+]], 187 ; CHECK: ldi [[REG2:r[0-9]+]], 170 ; CHECK: sts int.array+1, [[REG2]] ; CHECK: sts int.array, [[REG1]] ; CHECK: ldi

Hi all, In several of our tests, I have noticed that the register allocator allocates to virtual registers in a different order when compiling with the clang option -g. Before entering the register allocator, the code is identical when compiling with and without -g (with the exception of " DBG_VALUE" instructions). The only difference I can see is the value assigned to the slot index

Hi All, I am interested in creating a function that will take x number of lm objects and automate the comparison of each model (using anova). Here is a simple example (the actual function will involve more than what Im presenting but is irrelevant for the example): # sample data: id<-rep(1:20) n<-c(10,20,13,22,28,12,12,36,19,12,36,75,33,121,37,14,40,16,14,20)

Hi Evan, thanks for your response. On Mon, 19 Jan 2009, Evan Cheng wrote: >> For example, code which looks like that: >> >> load 0x1234, reg1 >> noop >> noop >> add reg1, 1 >> load 0x1236, reg2 >> >> can be safely transformed to: >> >> load 0x1234, reg1 >> load 0x1236, reg2 >> noop >> add reg1, 1 >> >

I’m not sure if it’s truly deterministic. It always gives the same results (so far) on my machine but I’m not sure that’s enough. My guess is it’s probably going to be deterministic on one machine but might well not be deterministic across environments. Like it might give varying results if cross compiled on different hosts, macOS vs intel Linux vs arm vs s390. (Obviously AVR is always a cross

Each of the data sets contains monthly observations on price indices for 7 countries. I use the fitted values from reg1 in the reg2 model. The interior loop executes without error as long as I explicitly specify the data set, i.e. data=dat70. However the code fails to execute if I specify the model in the form of the commented line, i. e reg1 <-dynlm(form1,data=Dnames[j]) I get the following