Thanks Martin for your patient and detailed explanations!
So with the base4 solution, base would import base4 so lapply() could
call base4::as.list()? Sounds good.
Making as.list() a *primitive* function with C-internal S3 and S4
method dispatch: like for length(), etc...? Sounds good too.
I'm wo
When you choose the CRAN Mirror in the Windows
GUI Packages menu in "R version 2.6.2 alpha (2008-01-26 r44181)"
the first mirror is highlighted when you open it even
if the mirror had been set. If the mirror had previously been
set then that previously set mirror should be highlighted rather
than
I'm doing some work on a potential patch to the Bioconductor package
Rgraphviz and have some questions on code that is contained in engine.c.
In particular, I am developing some custom shapes using polygon and need
to make sure that, with rendering, the line connecting the centers of
two polygo
On Thu, 7 Feb 2008, jing hua zhao wrote:
>
> I calculated a two-sided p values according to 2*(1-pnorm(8.104474)),
> which gives 4.440892e-16. However, it appears to be 5.30E-16 by a
> colleague and 5.2974E-16 from SAS. I tried to get around with mvtnorm
> package but it turns out to be using pn
Where is "doublernbeta(double, double, double);" ?
It's in Rmath.h, but in the source or supporting libs.
Oran
-Original Message-
From: Prof Brian Ripley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2008 1:36 PM
To: Oran Johnson
Cc: r-devel@r-project.org
Subject: RE: [
This is in followup to a thread on R-help with subject "Sampling".
I claim that R does the wrong thing by default when
sampling with unequal probabilities without replacement -
the selection probabilities are not proportional to 'prob',
for any draw after the first: I suggest that R do what S-PLUS
you should use the 'lower.tail' argument of pnorm(), e.g., check the
following:
2 * (1 - pnorm(8.104474))
2 * pnorm(8.104474, lower.tail = FALSE)
I hope it helps.
Best,
Dimitris
Dimitris Rizopoulos
Ph.D. Student
Biostatistical Centre
School of Public Health
Catholic University of Leuven
On 2/7/2008 12:00 PM, jing hua zhao wrote:
> Dear R list,
>
> I calculated a two-sided p values according to 2*(1-pnorm(8.104474)), which
> gives 4.440892e-16. However, it appears to be 5.30E-16 by a colleague and
> 5.2974E-16 from SAS. I tried to get around with mvtnorm package but it turns
On Thu, 7 Feb 2008, jing hua zhao wrote:
>
> Dear R list,
>
> I calculated a two-sided p values according to 2*(1-pnorm(8.104474)),
> which gives 4.440892e-16. However, it appears to be 5.30E-16 by a
> colleague and 5.2974E-16 from SAS. I tried to get around with mvtnorm
> package but it turns
I guess that you destroy the accuracy of the calculation by the
subtraction. Try
2*(pnorm(8.104474,lower=FALSE))
instead, which results in
5.29742e-16
for me.
Regards,
Martin
jing hua zhao schrieb:
> Dear R list,
>
> I calculated a two-sided p values according to 2*(1-pnorm(8.104474)), w
Dear R list,
I calculated a two-sided p values according to 2*(1-pnorm(8.104474)), which
gives 4.440892e-16. However, it appears to be 5.30E-16 by a colleague and
5.2974E-16 from SAS. I tried to get around with mvtnorm package but it turns
out to be using pnorm for univariate case. I should
宋时歌 wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I noticed that the 2.6.2 tar ball did not update, is it a good sign that no
> bugs have been found and it is ready to go?
>
>
No. It's a sign that I can't type. The crontab was set for making builds
on Feb 1-6 I have initiated a manual build which should show up on
www
12 matches
Mail list logo
