Dear group,
How to generate uniform probability choosing p to be 2% and 5%, in separate
trials for 100 times.
thanks in advance
RAE
[[alternative HTML version deleted]]
__
R-help@r-project.org mai
On 05/05/2014 00:26, Stephen Sentoff wrote:
Here is my sessionInfo from the linux machine where I see this behavior.
R version 3.1.0 (2014-04-10)
Platform: x86_64-pc-linux-gnu (64-bit)
locale:
[1] LC_CTYPE=en_US.UTF-8 LC_NUMERIC=C LC_TIME=en_US.UTF-8
[4] LC_COLLATE=en_US.UTF-8 LC_
Is there a standard function to generate messages like "longer
object length is not a multiple of shorter object length" but providing
more information like the names of the objects?
For example, "a/b" issues, "Warning message: In a/b : longer
object length is not a multiple of s
Hello
I know how to use R for estimating a parameter by using MLE if I have a simple
function f(x,a). I am trying to design a program for a complicated function
such as: g(.)=sum(integral(f(x,a,t,k))) where (a) is a parameter(needs to be
estimated) , integral depends on (t) and sum is over (k)
Here is my sessionInfo from the linux machine where I see this behavior.
R version 3.1.0 (2014-04-10)
Platform: x86_64-pc-linux-gnu (64-bit)
locale:
[1] LC_CTYPE=en_US.UTF-8 LC_NUMERIC=C LC_TIME=en_US.UTF-8
[4] LC_COLLATE=en_US.UTF-8 LC_MONETARY=en_US.UTF-8
LC_MESSAGES=en_US.UTF-8
On 04/05/2014, 5:03 PM, Stephen Sentoff wrote:
I was trying to use regexec to extract number fields from my data and got an
unexpected response. I can reproduce the issue with this small test case.
regexec("\\d{2,}", "abcd123")
I get a match at position 1, for length 7. Not what I expected.
I was trying to use regexec to extract number fields from my data and got an
unexpected response. I can reproduce the issue with this small test case.
regexec("\\d{2,}", "abcd123")
I get a match at position 1, for length 7. Not what I expected.
I do get the expected response (match at positi
Hello,
With ylim = c(100, 800) you can't get it to start at point (0, 0).
Try ylim = c(0, 800) instead.
Hope this helps,
Rui Barradas
Em 04-05-2014 18:19, Ahmed Attia escreveu:
Dear R usres,
Sorry to bother you with my basic question. I have a quick question about
tick mark in R. A reviewer
Thanks for this link, Gabor (and especially for the link
therein to your posting on Thu May 7 14:10:53 CEST 2009).
This confirms that the R 'bc' package is not on CRAN and
points to where it can be sourced from. I used to have bc.R
installed on an old machine, which has gone into terminal
coma now.
Dear R usres,
Sorry to bother you with my basic question. I have a quick question about
tick mark in R. A reviewer wants the tick marks of the graph to start at
0:0 point. My current code below produces the tick mark a little far from
the corner;
plot(Simu2~Irrig, data=Ahmed,pch=17, col=1,subset=
Checking this with the bc R package (https://code.google.com/p/r-bc/),
the Ryacas package (CRAN), the gmp package (CRAN) and the Windows 8.1
calculator all four give the same result:
> library(bc)
> bc("168988580159 * 36662978")
[1] "6195624596620653502"
> library(Ryacas)
> yacas("168988580159 *
On 04-May-2014 14:13:27 Jorge I Velez wrote:
> Try
>
> options(digits = 22)
> 168988580159 * 36662978
># [1] 6195624596620653568
>
> HTH,
> Jorge.-
Err, not quite ... !
I hitch my horses to my plough (with help from R):
options(digits=22)
168988580159*8 = 1351908641272 (copy down)
168988580159*
On 04 May 2014, at 16:13 , Jorge I Velez wrote:
> Try
>
> options(digits = 22)
> 168988580159 * 36662978
> # [1] 6195624596620653568
But the last 5 digits are supposed to match those of
> 80159 * 62978
[1] 5048253502
so the result is off by 66. Further analysis will likely reveal rounding
Adding a line like
options(width=60)
should make the R output narrower, so that it will fit into the highlighted
frame. If you don't want to see this line, you can put it into a separate
chunk that isn't echoed.
--
Steve Sentoff
shsent...@comcast.net
__
Try
options(digits = 22)
168988580159 * 36662978
# [1] 6195624596620653568
HTH,
Jorge.-
On Sun, May 4, 2014 at 10:44 PM, ARTENTOR Diego Tentor <
diegotento...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Trying algorithm for products with large numbers i encountered a difference
> between result of 168988580159 * 366
On 04 May 2014, at 14:44 , ARTENTOR Diego Tentor
wrote:
> Trying algorithm for products with large numbers i encountered a difference
> between result of 168988580159 * 36662978 in my algorithm and r product.
> The Microsoft calculator confirm my number.
>
> 168988580159 * 36662978
[1] 6.19
Wow do you trust Windows calculator with those large numbers
In fact do you at all trust Windows calculator???
Try to do this calculation
3 +8*5
in windows calculator.
In standard view you get
55
In scientific view you get
43.
Try it yourself!!
Do you know the right answer?
T
Trying algorithm for products with large numbers i encountered a difference
between result of 168988580159 * 36662978 in my algorithm and r product.
The Microsoft calculator confirm my number.
Thanks.
--
*Gráfica ARTENTOR *
de Diego L. Tentor
Echagüe 558
Tel.:0343 4310119
The Experimental Design task view seems
like a reasonable place to start:
http://cran.r-project.org/web/views/ExperimentalDesign.html
Pat
On 03/05/2014 08:27, kabir opeyemi wrote:
Dear All,
Please can someone help advise on procedures for construction of optimal
designs and estimation of para
19 matches
Mail list logo
