As picture, the duration column has strange number. Is this normal behavior?
Tag: Linear algebra
insert/update/delete multiple tables in single SQL statement
Related:
CATPCA Cronbach’s alpha scores: interpretation
In the example included on the SPSS info page (https://www.ibm.com/support/knowledgecenter/en/SSLVMB_sub/spss/tutorials/catpca_guttman_dim.html) the alpha score for dimension 2 is .315. Yet with an Eigenvalue of 1.337 this dimension still adds explained variance to the two-dimensional model (total alpha score = .986).
How to interpret this? Does a low alpha score for dim 2 ( 1). So should users only look at Eigenvalues of the dimensions and the Total Cronbach’s alpha (or Eigenvalue/Explained variance) of the overall model? In my own current research using CATPCA I encounter similar output.
Related:
15 nodes TSP problem in cplexlsqnonnegmilpex.m(Matlab)
[cplexlsqnonnegmilpex][1] is not able to solve this problem with low gap value. And reaching solution takes a long time. (approximately 2 hours)
How can I solve this problem with low gap value within a short time?
I attached the code and the result [link text][2]of the problem at the end of the run to this box.
Thanks in advance.
[1]: /answers/storage/temp/18771-cplexlsqnonnegmilpex-problem.txt
[2]: /answers/storage/temp/18772-15noderesults.txt
Related:
Custom constraint issue-ILOG
Anyone else encounter this? The following code demonstrates the issue and is mostly copied verbatim from the extensions manual (LEConstraint).
import ilog.cp.*;
import ilog.concert.*;
public class Runner {
public static void main(String[] args) {
try {
IloCP cp = new IloCP();
IloIntVar a = cp.intVar(2, 10);
IloIntVar y = cp.intVar(2, 10);
cp.add(new LEConstraint(cp, a, y));
cp.add(cp.minimize(a));
cp.solve();
} catch (IloException e) {
}
}
}
class LEConstraint extends IloCustomConstraint {
private IloIntVar _x;
private IloIntVar _y;
public LEConstraint(IloCP cp, IloIntVar x, IloIntVar y) throws IloException {
super(cp);
_x = x;
_y = y;
addVar(x);
addVar(y);
}
public void execute() {
if (isFixed(_x) && isFixed(_y))
if (getValue(_x) > getValue(_y))
setValue(_x, getValue(_x)+1);
}
}
Resulting in:
! Search terminated , no solution found.
! Number of branches : 0
! Number of fails : 0
! Total memory usage : 2.3 MB (2.3 MB CP Optimizer + 0.0 MB Concert)
! Time spent in solve : 0.01s (0.01s engine + 0.00s extraction)
! Search speed (br. / s) : 0
@Xavier Nodet
Related:
Interaction contrast for within-subject variable in mixed design
D: 6 levels, between Ss
C: 2 levels, within Ss
I need to test the effect of C at D3.
Here is what I thought the correct syntax should be:
GLM C1 C2 BY D
/WSFACTOR=time 2 Polynomial
/METHOD=SSTYPE(3)
/CRITERIA=ALPHA(.05)
/WSDESIGN=time
/DESIGN=D
/LMATRIX “locate contrast at D3 ” D 0 0 1 0 0 0;
/MMATRIX “effect of C” all 1 -1.
I get this error: “This L matrix is not estimable. Hypothesis tests cannot be computed.”
Question: The LMATRIX code must be wrong. What should the correct LMATRIX line be?