Loopes
  Home FAQ Contact Sign in
 
 Advanced search
MATCHING GROUPS



more...
POPULAR GROUPS

more...
found 545 articles for 0.936 sec
Hi there, perhaps, someone can sort me out? Assume you have a set of J objects, and you want to generate all possible (permuted) subsets of size j = 2, ..., J-1 selected from the set of J objects (the subsets should at least contain 2 objects, and the set containing all J objects is trivial) --- I used the "permpos.m" function (downloadable at http://www.mathworks.com/matlabcentral/fileexchange/11216     

Group: comp.softsys.matlab · Group Profile · Search for Loopes in comp.softsys.matlab
Author: Hans-Friedrich
Date: Jun 8, 2010 03:28

"rubendelafuente" <ruben.rdelafuente@gmail.com> wrote in message news:8f6393e6-4c3f-4f61-81fe-6d93380c9607@c10g2000yqi.googlegroups.com... On Jun 8, 11:11 am, rubendelafuente <ruben.rdelafue...@gmail.com> wrote: I am trying to write a macro to post-process machine translated files. One of the issues with translation from EN to ES is that "please"+ command normally is translated without
Show full article (1.89Kb)
On Jun 8, 11:11 am, rubendelafuente <ruben.rdelafue...@gmail.com> wrote: > I am trying to write a macro to post-process machine translated files. > One of the issues with translation from EN to ES is that "please"+ > command normally is translated without please, just the command. It > would be a tedious task for post editors to delete every occurrence of > "please" translation and the upper     

Group: microsoft.public.vb.general.discussion · Group Profile · Search for Loopes in microsoft.public.vb.general.discussion
Author: Dave O.
Date: Jun 8, 2010 03:26

On 8/06/2010 15:41, Sylvia Else wrote: On 7/06/2010 6:03 PM, johnsuth@nospam.com.au wrote: Does ARTC have an algorithm for determining which train gets priority at passing loops? What do you mean by "priority"? One train will typically arrive first, and have to stop. If the other doesn't arrive too soon, it will be able to run through. Are you asking about timetabling
Show full article (2.39Kb) · Show article thread
On 07/06/2010 17:37, Bob Butler wrote: > > "Dee Earley" <dee.earley@icode.co.uk> wrote in message > news:O9f7dFlBLHA.4584@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl... >> On 07/06/2010 14:43, NadCixelsyd wrote: >>> I've been hitting break to no avail. It never occurred to me to hit >>> ctrl-break. Merci beaucoup and a hat-tip for the education. >> >> Also note that the Stop button does the same, but requires a     

Group: microsoft.public.vb.general.discussion · Group Profile · Search for Loopes in microsoft.public.vb.general.discussion
Author: rubendelafuente
Date: Jun 8, 2010 02:16

Jie wrote: My main question is actually how to use "parfor" efficiently but I don't quite understand the last sentence in your message. I do simulations that requires repeating many frequencies. So I use "parfor" for the frequency loop. By comparing with "parfor" and "for" computation time, seems I only have saved 40%% of computation time. I need to mention that within each
Show full article (1.62Kb) · Show article thread
Thank you for your reply, Walter. I was trying to run your modified program but it didn't run because of the way b was defined. My main question is actually how to use "parfor" efficiently but I don't quite understand the last sentence in your message. I do simulations that requires repeating many frequencies. So I use "parfor" for the frequency loop. By comparing with "parfor" and "for" computation     

Group: aus.rail · Group Profile · Search for Loopes in aus.rail
Author: Kevin Martin
Date: Jun 8, 2010 01:23

Jie wrote: Hi, I have just bought Matlab Parallel Computing Toolbox and tried to use some very simple test to see how much time I may be able to save by using "parfor" instead of "for" loop. I have 4 processors on my local PC and I used matlabpool to open them all. To my surprise, using "parfor" is not too much faster than using "for" loops. Am I doing anything wrong here?
Show full article (0.94Kb) · Show article thread
Hi, I have just bought Matlab Parallel Computing Toolbox and tried to use some very simple test to see how much time I may be able to save by using "parfor" instead of "for" loop. I have 4 processors on my local PC and I used matlabpool to open them all. To my surprise, using "parfor" is not too much faster than using "for" loops. Am I doing anything wrong here? clear all; close all tic r     

Group: microsoft.public.vb.general.discussion · Group Profile · Search for Loopes in microsoft.public.vb.general.discussion
Author: Dee Earley
Date: Jun 8, 2010 01:16

Show full article (0.80Kb)
    

Group: aus.rail · Group Profile · Search for Loopes in aus.rail
Author: Sylvia Else
Date: Jun 7, 2010 22:41

Show full article (0.36Kb)
    

Group: comp.softsys.matlab · Group Profile · Search for Loopes in comp.softsys.matlab
Author: Walter Roberson
Date: Jun 7, 2010 21:46

Show full article (1.91Kb) · Show article thread
    

Group: comp.softsys.matlab · Group Profile · Search for Loopes in comp.softsys.matlab
Author: Jie
Date: Jun 7, 2010 17:58

Show full article (1.37Kb) · Show article thread
    

Group: comp.softsys.matlab · Group Profile · Search for Loopes in comp.softsys.matlab
Author: Walter Roberson
Date: Jun 7, 2010 16:37

Show full article (0.89Kb) · Show article thread
    

Group: comp.softsys.matlab · Group Profile · Search for Loopes in comp.softsys.matlab
Author: Jie
Date: Jun 7, 2010 16:25

Show full article (0.48Kb)
1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · 6 · 7 · 8 · 9 · next