Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*S\-PLUS\s+Vs\s+some\s+other\s+softwares\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*S\-PLUS\s+Vs\s+some\s+other\s+softwares\s*$/: 8 ]

Total 8 documents matching your query.

1. S-PLUS Vs some other softwares (score: 1): Author: "Pravin" <jadhavpr@vcu.edu>; Date: Mon, 1 Mar 2004 19:38:39 -0500; Hi all, (Almost)Always I have written S-PLUS code where for() loop looked indispensable to ME. Since it did my job at the expense of slightly more dos time, I never looked at the alternatives. But, t; /archives/html/s-news/2004-03/msg00010.html (9,018 bytes)
2. Re: S-PLUS Vs some other softwares (score: 1): Author: "Pravin" <jadhavpr@vcu.edu>; Date: Mon, 1 Mar 2004 19:47:11 -0500; Sorry for the errors in my previous email. The loop should read-- (line 3) slope[i,]<-coe(od.fit)[2]} (line4) --Original Message-- From: s-news-owner@lists.biostat.wustl.edu [mailto:s-news-owner@list; /archives/html/s-news/2004-03/msg00011.html (10,491 bytes)
3. Re: S-PLUS Vs some other softwares (score: 1): Author: "Liaw, Andy" <andy_liaw@merck.com>; Date: Mon, 1 Mar 2004 20:44:24 -0500; may want to check out lmList in the nlme library. HTH, Andy --Original Message-- From: s-news-owner@lists.biostat.wustl.edu [mailto:s-news-owner@lists.biostat.wustl.edu] On Behalf Of Pravin Sent: Mo; /archives/html/s-news/2004-03/msg00015.html (12,111 bytes)
4. Re: S-PLUS Vs some other softwares (score: 1): Author: Patrick Burns <pburns@pburns.seanet.com>; Date: Tue, 02 Mar 2004 09:44:17 +0000; I don't see a way out of a for loop, but you can do it much more efficiently. "lm" does a lot of things that you only really need to do once. An outline of an alternative computation is: for(i in 1:n; /archives/html/s-news/2004-03/msg00020.html (10,330 bytes)
5. Re: S-PLUS Vs some other softwares (score: 1): Author: "Gunter, Bert" <bert_gunter@merck.com>; Date: Tue, 2 Mar 2004 08:57:01 -0500; Andy said, lmList will probably do what you want, but as it uses lm(), it may also take a while. If you wish to do it "by hand" yourself, try by() [which is a wrapper for tapply()] and use lsfit ins; /archives/html/s-news/2004-03/msg00023.html (13,494 bytes)
6. Re: S-PLUS Vs some other softwares (score: 1): Author: Martin Maechler <maechler@stat.math.ethz.ch>; Date: Wed, 3 Mar 2004 08:48:52 +0100; BertG> As Andy said, lmList will probably do what you want, BertG> but as it uses lm(), it may also take a while. If you BertG> wish to do it "by hand" yourself, try by() [which is BertG> a wrapper; /archives/html/s-news/2004-03/msg00030.html (9,209 bytes)
7. Re: S-PLUS Vs some other softwares (score: 1): Author: Frank E Harrell Jr <feh3k@spamcop.net>; Date: Wed, 3 Mar 2004 08:49:53 -0500; A slightly faster approach may be to use the following function which is part of the Hmisc library. The S-Plus version is shown below. x is a matrix, y a vector. lm.fit.qr.bare <- function(x, y, tole; /archives/html/s-news/2004-03/msg00034.html (11,049 bytes)
8. Re: S-PLUS Vs some other softwares (score: 1): Author: Tim Hesterberg <timh@insightful.com>; Date: 5 Mar 2004 15:33:10 -0800; The problem posed is to find 500,000 regression coefficients, one for each subject in a large data frame. Below is a solution that takes 16 seconds in a test problem with 500,000 subjects. In contras; /archives/html/s-news/2004-03/msg00074.html (11,346 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 8
Page: [1]