---Dan Bron wrote:
> > What I want to do is to see how the fit has changed over time
>
> Personally, when I want to partition along different (non-leading) axes,
> I turn to ;. first. In this case, I probably would have written 2 2
> (1&lsfit ::0:);._3 t . It's no shorter than the \ formulation, but
> it feels cleaner to me, as it avoids the transposition (and the
> attendant un-transpositions).
I agree in general however one benefit of the \ formulation is that it is easy
to also look at how the fit changes progressively over time. i.e.
<@|:\ |: t
+-+---+-----+-------+---------+-----------+-------------+--...
|0|0 7|0 7 8|0 7 8 9|0 7 8 9 2|0 7 8 9 2 2|0 7 8 9 2 2 5|0 ...
|5|5 3|5 3 8|5 3 8 0|5 3 8 0 0|5 3 8 0 0 5|5 3 8 0 0 5 9|5 ...
+-+---+-----+-------+---------+-----------+-------------+--...
(1 lsfit ::0: |:)\ |: t
0 0
5 _0.28571429
4.6754386 0.13157895
5.32 _0.22
3.0509554 0.02866242
3.6962617 _0.042056075
4.38 _0.02
4.5664336 _0.013986014
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
