similar to: solving ODE's in matrix form with lsoda()

Thanks, Charles. I pulled your change and it fixed my segmentation fault. I discovered the following code at line 571 in usbhid-ups.c. This is part of the "checking for alternatives" code: if (!strcasecmp(cmdname, "shutdown.return")) { int ret; /* Ensure "ups.start.auto" is set to "yes", if supported */ if

Dear all, Has anybody tried numerical solving of ODE's and/or transport equations in R? (Don't ask how we ended up in using R for this job, in the first place!) More precisely, does anybody know any technical issue that could make the work insecure in the sense of propagation of errors? Is there any track of evidence that R is, in this kind of task, less reliable than e.g. MatLab?

I have been trying to make use of the odesolve library on my university's Linux grid - currently R version 2.0.1 is installed and the system runs 64-bit Scientific Linux based on Redhat. I cannot seem to get lsoda working when I define the model as a shared C library. For example, the following snippet uses the mymod.c example bundled with the package: ### START rm(list=ls())

I am running R 1.2.3 with ESS5.1.18 with Windows 98. I am trying to use lsoda in the odesolve apckage and am having problems. Question: The return value of the function of the system of ode's has to be a list that includes first, the ode's and second, "a vector (possibly with a `names' attribute) of global values that are required at each point in `times'." I

All- I am interested in estimating a parameter that is the starting value for an ODE model. That is, in the typical combined fitting procedure using nls and lsoda (alternatively rk4), I first defined the ODE model: minmod <- function(t, y, parms) { G <- y[1] X <- y[2] with(as.list(parms),{ I_t <- approx(time, I.input, t)$y dG <- -1*(p1 + X)*G +p1*G_b dX <-

Hi - I am getting different results when I run the numerical integrator function lsoda (odesolve package) on a Mac and a PC. I am trying to simulating a system of 10 ODE's with two exogenous pulsed inputs to the system, and have had reasonably good success with many model parameter sets. Under some parameter sets, however, the simulations fail on the Mac (see error message below). The

Hi. I have a client who wants some way that his analog phones can call out even after the power is out and the UPS has died -- some way that a phone can connect directly to an fxo or some such when power is gone. Any hardware around which can do this? I have heard of some ATA's which do this, do any of the channel banks have this capability? Thanks. -- Your life is like a penny.

Hi, I am supportive of the asterisk, but I have some concern, though the concern also applies to traditional pbx as well. Hope someone can shine some light into it. Thanks. During a power failure situation, analog pstn lines that connect directly to the analog phones will most likely still be able to make and receive calls. However, for the Asterisk implementation, unless you have a

Hello, I am trying to solve a problem that I can foresee when I deploy Asterisk into a few SOHO situations soon. In Nebraska and in my area of Western Pennsylvania we have violent thunderstorms in spring and summer and sometimes very heavy wet snow in Winter. Both type of event will take out the power of a period of 30sec to 36-hours. So no UPS system would be able to handle a system for over

Hello, I am an R newbie, trying to use lsoda to solve standard Lotka-Volterra competition equations. My question is: how do I pass a parameter that varies with time, like say, phix <- 0.7 + runif(tmax) in the example below. # defining function lotvol <- function(t,n,p){ x <- n[1]; y <- n[2] rx <- p["rx"]; ry <- p["ry"] Kx <-

Hi R used with C-code experts, I had a look at the archives and did not find anything on this, so hopefully I am not doubling up. I have previously used the following approach where I needed some very small/large numbers (using Brobdingnag): surfacewithdiff <- function(t, y, p) { const=p["const"] kay =p["kay"] psii=p["psii"]

Dear List, Wonder if you have some thoughts on the following question using lsoda in desolve: I have the following data and function: require(deSolve) times <- c(0:24) tin  <- 0.5 D <- 400 V    <- 26.3 k <-0.056 k12  <- 0.197118 k21  <- 0.022665 yini <- c(dy1 = 0,dy2 = 0)  events <- data.frame(var = "dy1",time = c(10,15),value = c(200,100),method =

Hi All, I am running R 2.2.0 on Mac OS 10.4.2, dual G5 processors with 8 Gig RAM. I am running a simulation with lsoda that requires ~378 s to complete one set of time intervals. I need to optimize the parameters, and so need to considerably speed up the simulation. I have tried to figure out how to change the appropriate memory allocation and have search R help and Introductory

Dear list - Does anyone have any ideas / comments about why I am receiving the following warning when I run lsoda: 1: lsoda-- at t (=r1), too much accuracy requested in: lsoda(start, times, model, parms) 2: for precision of machine.. see tolsf (=r2) in: lsoda(start, times, model, parms) I have tried changing both rtol and atol but without success. I saw the thread in the

Dear Hank, Last question first: really, only you can say for sure if 4e-281 and 5e-11 are small enough; it depends on the units you measure your state variables in. However, this strategy cannot get the state variables to exactly 0. Obviously, you could get closer to 0.0 faster by setting the derivatives even larger in absolute value. You may run into problems with the solver when the

Thanks to Dieter Menne and Spencer Graves I started to get my way through lsoda() Now I need to use it in with nls() to assess parameters I have a go with a basic example dy/dt = K1*conc I try to assess the value of K1 from a simulated data set with a K1 close to 2. Here is (I think) the best code that I've done so far even though it crashes when I call nls()

I'm trying to use odesolve for integrating various series of coupled 1st order differential equations (derived from a system of enzymatic catalysis and copied below, apologies for the excessively long set of parameters). The thing that confuses me is that, whilst I can run the function rk4: out <- rk4(y=y,times=times,func=func, parms=parms) and the results look not unreasonable:

R help list subscribers, I am a new user of R. I am attempting to use R to explore a set of equations specifying the dynamics of a three trophic level food chain. I have put together this code for the function that is to be evaluted by LSODA. My equations Rprime, Cprime, and Pprime are meant to describe the actual equation of the derivative. When I run LSODA, I do not get the output that

I'm solving the differential equation dy/dx = xy-1 with y(0) = sqrt(pi/2). This can be used in computing the tail of the normal distribution. (The actual solution is y(x) = exp(x^2/2) * Integral_x_inf {exp(-t^2/2) dt} = Integral_0_inf {exp (-xt - t^2/2) dt}. For large x, y ~ 1/x, starting around x~2.) I'm testing both lsoda and rk4 from the package odesolve. rk4 is accurate using step