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.
