Alejandro C. Frery: > @ARTICLE{AlmironSilvaMM:2009, > author = {Almiron, M. and Almeida, E. S. and Miranda, M.}, > title = {The Reliability of Statistical Functions in Four Software > Packages Freely used in Numerical Computation}, > journal = {Brazilian Journal of Probability and Statistics}, > year = {in press}, > volume = {Special Issue on Statistical Image and Signal Processing}, > url = {http://www.imstat.org/bjps/}} > > is freely available under the "Future Papers" link. It makes a nice > comparison of the numerical properties of R, Ox, Octave and Python.
Thanks for posting this. I’m happy to see that the results for R were generally excellent, and almost always better than for the three other software packages. But there were a few cases where R did not turn out to be the winner. Rather surprising that Ox was better than R for computing the autocorrelation coefficient for two of the datasets, given its terrible results for the standard deviation. Anybody have any ideas why? -- Karl Ove Hufthammer ______________________________________________ R-help@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.