Mercurial > repos > jjkoehorst > sapp

comparison rnaseq/cutadapt/test-data/lps_arrhythmia_log.txt @ 11:a712b378e090

Find changesets by keywords (author, files, the commit message), revision number or hash, or revset expression.
cutadapt added
author jjkoehorst <jasperkoehorst@gmail.com>
date Sat, 21 Feb 2015 16:33:42 +0100
parents
children
comparison
equal deleted inserted replaced
10:3378d12591ea 11:a712b378e090
1 Data set has 452 vectors with 279 features.
2 Sampled 452 points out of 452
3 calculateLambdaMax: n=279, m=452, m+=245, m-=207
4 computed value of lambda_max: 1.8231e+02
5
6 **** Initial point: nz=0, f= 0.69314718056, lambda= 1.641e+02
7 iter 1, gpnorm=4.2035e-02, nonzero= 1 ( 0.4%), function=6.931471805599e-01, alpha=1.0000e+00
8 iter 2, gpnorm=1.9781e-02, nonzero= 1 ( 0.4%), function=6.903943411116e-01, alpha=8.0000e-01
9 iter 3, gpnorm=6.0325e-03, nonzero= 1 ( 0.4%), function=6.896822613633e-01, alpha=6.4000e-01
10 iter 4, gpnorm=7.2193e-04, nonzero= 1 ( 0.4%), function=6.896101060279e-01, alpha=5.1200e-01
11 iter 5, gpnorm=1.0530e-05, nonzero= 1 ( 0.4%), function=6.896090566277e-01, alpha=4.0960e-01
12 iter 6, gpnorm=1.7618e-09, nonzero= 1 ( 0.4%), function=6.896090564044e-01, alpha=3.2768e-01
13 Function evals = 12, Gradient evals = 6.0
14
15 **** Initial point: nz=1, f= 0.689609056404, lambda= 1.168e+02
16 iter 1, gpnorm=1.7618e-09, nonzero= 1 ( 0.4%), function=6.896090564044e-01, alpha=3.2768e-01
17 Function evals = 2, Gradient evals = 1.0
18
19 **** Initial point: nz=1, f= 0.689609056404, lambda= 8.310e+01
20 iter 1, gpnorm=1.7618e-09, nonzero= 1 ( 0.4%), function=6.896090564044e-01, alpha=3.2768e-01
21 Function evals = 2, Gradient evals = 1.0
22
23 **** Initial point: nz=1, f= 0.689609056404, lambda= 5.914e+01
24 iter 1, gpnorm=1.7618e-09, nonzero= 1 ( 0.4%), function=6.896090564044e-01, alpha=3.2768e-01
25 Function evals = 2, Gradient evals = 1.0
26
27 **** Initial point: nz=1, f= 0.689609056404, lambda= 4.209e+01
28 iter 1, gpnorm=1.7618e-09, nonzero= 1 ( 0.4%), function=6.896090564044e-01, alpha=3.2768e-01
29 Function evals = 2, Gradient evals = 1.0
30
31 **** Initial point: nz=1, f= 0.689609056404, lambda= 2.996e+01
32 iter 1, gpnorm=1.7618e-09, nonzero= 1 ( 0.4%), function=6.896090564044e-01, alpha=3.2768e-01
33 Function evals = 2, Gradient evals = 1.0
34
35 **** Initial point: nz=1, f= 0.689609056404, lambda= 2.132e+01
36 iter 1, gpnorm=1.7618e-09, nonzero= 1 ( 0.4%), function=6.896090564044e-01, alpha=3.2768e-01
37 Function evals = 2, Gradient evals = 1.0
38
39 **** Initial point: nz=1, f= 0.689609056404, lambda= 1.517e+01
40 iter 1, gpnorm=1.7618e-09, nonzero= 1 ( 0.4%), function=6.896090564044e-01, alpha=3.2768e-01
41 Function evals = 2, Gradient evals = 1.0
42
43 **** Initial point: nz=1, f= 0.689609056404, lambda= 1.080e+01
44 iter 1, gpnorm=1.7618e-09, nonzero= 1 ( 0.4%), function=6.896090564044e-01, alpha=3.2768e-01
45 Function evals = 2, Gradient evals = 1.0
46
47 **** Initial point: nz=1, f= 0.689609056404, lambda= 7.685e+00
48 iter 1, gpnorm=1.7618e-09, nonzero= 1 ( 0.4%), function=6.896090564044e-01, alpha=3.2768e-01
49 Function evals = 2, Gradient evals = 1.0
50
51 **** Initial point: nz=1, f= 0.689609056404, lambda= 5.469e+00
52 iter 1, gpnorm=1.7618e-09, nonzero= 1 ( 0.4%), function=6.896090564044e-01, alpha=3.2768e-01
53 Function evals = 2, Gradient evals = 1.0
54
55 lambda=1.64e+02 solution:
56 optimal log-likelihood function value: 6.90e-01
57 optimal *regularized* log-likelihood function value: 6.90e-01
58 number of non-zeros at the optimum: 1
59 number of iterations required: 6
60 prediction using this solution:
61 54.20% of vectors were correctly predicted.
62 245 correctly predicted.
63 207 in +1 predicted to be in -1.
64 0 in -1 predicted to be in +1.
65 0 in +1 with 50/50 chance.
66 0 in -1 with 50/50 chance.
67
68 lambda=1.17e+02 solution:
69 optimal log-likelihood function value: 6.90e-01
70 optimal *regularized* log-likelihood function value: 6.90e-01
71 number of non-zeros at the optimum: 1
72 number of iterations required: 1
73 prediction using this solution:
74 54.20% of vectors were correctly predicted.
75 245 correctly predicted.
76 207 in +1 predicted to be in -1.
77 0 in -1 predicted to be in +1.
78 0 in +1 with 50/50 chance.
79 0 in -1 with 50/50 chance.
80
81 lambda=8.31e+01 solution:
82 optimal log-likelihood function value: 6.90e-01
83 optimal *regularized* log-likelihood function value: 6.90e-01
84 number of non-zeros at the optimum: 1
85 number of iterations required: 1
86 prediction using this solution:
87 54.20% of vectors were correctly predicted.
88 245 correctly predicted.
89 207 in +1 predicted to be in -1.
90 0 in -1 predicted to be in +1.
91 0 in +1 with 50/50 chance.
92 0 in -1 with 50/50 chance.
93
94 lambda=5.91e+01 solution:
95 optimal log-likelihood function value: 6.90e-01
96 optimal *regularized* log-likelihood function value: 6.90e-01
97 number of non-zeros at the optimum: 1
98 number of iterations required: 1
99 prediction using this solution:
100 54.20% of vectors were correctly predicted.
101 245 correctly predicted.
102 207 in +1 predicted to be in -1.
103 0 in -1 predicted to be in +1.
104 0 in +1 with 50/50 chance.
105 0 in -1 with 50/50 chance.
106
107 lambda=4.21e+01 solution:
108 optimal log-likelihood function value: 6.90e-01
109 optimal *regularized* log-likelihood function value: 6.90e-01
110 number of non-zeros at the optimum: 1
111 number of iterations required: 1
112 prediction using this solution:
113 54.20% of vectors were correctly predicted.
114 245 correctly predicted.
115 207 in +1 predicted to be in -1.
116 0 in -1 predicted to be in +1.
117 0 in +1 with 50/50 chance.
118 0 in -1 with 50/50 chance.
119
120 lambda=3.00e+01 solution:
121 optimal log-likelihood function value: 6.90e-01
122 optimal *regularized* log-likelihood function value: 6.90e-01
123 number of non-zeros at the optimum: 1
124 number of iterations required: 1
125 prediction using this solution:
126 54.20% of vectors were correctly predicted.
127 245 correctly predicted.
128 207 in +1 predicted to be in -1.
129 0 in -1 predicted to be in +1.
130 0 in +1 with 50/50 chance.
131 0 in -1 with 50/50 chance.
132
133 lambda=2.13e+01 solution:
134 optimal log-likelihood function value: 6.90e-01
135 optimal *regularized* log-likelihood function value: 6.90e-01
136 number of non-zeros at the optimum: 1
137 number of iterations required: 1
138 prediction using this solution:
139 54.20% of vectors were correctly predicted.
140 245 correctly predicted.
141 207 in +1 predicted to be in -1.
142 0 in -1 predicted to be in +1.
143 0 in +1 with 50/50 chance.
144 0 in -1 with 50/50 chance.
145
146 lambda=1.52e+01 solution:
147 optimal log-likelihood function value: 6.90e-01
148 optimal *regularized* log-likelihood function value: 6.90e-01
149 number of non-zeros at the optimum: 1
150 number of iterations required: 1
151 prediction using this solution:
152 54.20% of vectors were correctly predicted.
153 245 correctly predicted.
154 207 in +1 predicted to be in -1.
155 0 in -1 predicted to be in +1.
156 0 in +1 with 50/50 chance.
157 0 in -1 with 50/50 chance.
158
159 lambda=1.08e+01 solution:
160 optimal log-likelihood function value: 6.90e-01
161 optimal *regularized* log-likelihood function value: 6.90e-01
162 number of non-zeros at the optimum: 1
163 number of iterations required: 1
164 prediction using this solution:
165 54.20% of vectors were correctly predicted.
166 245 correctly predicted.
167 207 in +1 predicted to be in -1.
168 0 in -1 predicted to be in +1.
169 0 in +1 with 50/50 chance.
170 0 in -1 with 50/50 chance.
171
172 lambda=7.68e+00 solution:
173 optimal log-likelihood function value: 6.90e-01
174 optimal *regularized* log-likelihood function value: 6.90e-01
175 number of non-zeros at the optimum: 1
176 number of iterations required: 1
177 prediction using this solution:
178 54.20% of vectors were correctly predicted.
179 245 correctly predicted.
180 207 in +1 predicted to be in -1.
181 0 in -1 predicted to be in +1.
182 0 in +1 with 50/50 chance.
183 0 in -1 with 50/50 chance.
184
185 lambda=5.47e+00 solution:
186 optimal log-likelihood function value: 6.90e-01
187 optimal *regularized* log-likelihood function value: 6.90e-01
188 number of non-zeros at the optimum: 1
189 number of iterations required: 1
190 prediction using this solution:
191 54.20% of vectors were correctly predicted.
192 245 correctly predicted.
193 207 in +1 predicted to be in -1.
194 0 in -1 predicted to be in +1.
195 0 in +1 with 50/50 chance.
196 0 in -1 with 50/50 chance.
197