Batch scripting r.in.lidar in pyQGIS for LiDAR DEM output? I need to use pyQGIS to write a script that will run the r.in.lidar GRASS 7 on a set of LAS files.   I am terrible at Python, but I need this for my task. I would like to process as a batch. How can I set up my script in the PyQGIS console? And how do I set input in the arguments?
Batch processing LiDAR files (.las to raster) with PyQGIS? for layers in glob.glob("*.las"):         processing.runalg("grass7:r.in.lidar", "input_las",5,1,"",1,100,"","",5,"","",False,True,True,"331289.57265,337990.42735,4558790.0,4560890.0",0,layers+"E:/las_new/.tif")      {'output': 'PNOA_2016_CAT_huso31_346-4560.lasE:/las_new/.tif'}   {'output': 'PNOA_2016_CAT_huso31_346-4562.lasE:/las_new/.tif'}   {'output': 'PNOA_2016_CAT_huso31_346-4564.lasE:/las_new/.tif'}   {'output': 'PNOA_2016_CAT_huso31_346-4566.lasE:/las_new/.tif'}   {'output': 'PNOA_2016_CAT_huso31_346-4568.lasE:/las_new/.tif'}   {'output': 'PNOA_2016_CAT_huso31_346-4570.lasE:/las_new/.tif'}   output_ras=("E:/las_Ras")   for layers in glob.glob("*.las"):     processing.runalg("grass7:r.in.lidar", "input_las",5,1,"",1,100,"","",5,"","",False,True,True,"331289.57265,337990.42735,4558790.0,4560890.0",0,layers+"output_ras.tif")      {'output': 'PNOA_2016_CAT_huso31_346-4560.lasoutput_ras.tif'}   {'output': 'PNOA_2016_CAT_huso31_346-4562.lasoutput_ras.tif'}   {'output': 'PNOA_2016_CAT_huso31_346-4564.lasoutput_ras.tif'}   {'output': 'PNOA_2016_CAT_huso31_346-4566.lasoutput_ras.tif'}   {'output': 'PNOA_2016_CAT_huso31_346-4568.lasoutput_ras.tif'}   {'output': 'PNOA_2016_CAT_huso31_346-4570.lasoutput_ras.tif'}     for layers in glob.glob("*.las"):     processing.runalg("grass7:r.in.lidar", "input_las",5,1,"",1,100,"","",5,"","",False,True,True,"331289.57265,337990.42735,4558790.0,4560890.0",0,"output_ras.tif")      {'output': 'output_ras.tif'}   {'output': 'output_ras.tif'}   {'output': 'output_ras.tif'}   {'output': 'output_ras.tif'}   {'output': 'output_ras.tif'}   {'output': 'output_ras.tif'}   I would like to batch process many LAS files to rasters using the PyQGIS algorithm. As you can see in the code, I think the final problem is with the output. It does not write the files out to my defined output pathway as tif files. Also how can I make sure the naming of output rasters are according to the original LAS they are generated from? What am I doing wrong here? Not a pro at Python. Started 3 days ago.
get UTC time in PHP While using Wild Shape, do I use Unarmored Defense or the creature's Armor Class? Move incoming Outlook emails to folder containing previous conversation I file email conversations in various folders. But every new email in that conversation goes to inbox, so I have to manually move it to the folder that contains the rest of the conversation. Is there a way for Outlook to do this automatically with all new emails?  What I want: Outlook will do the following automatically as long as it's running:   For all unread emails in inbox... ...if email is not the first in the conversation, search for folders where that conversation is stored. If found, move the new unread email to the first* folder it finds (except for Inbox, Trash, or Sent). Optionally: If there is more than one folder containing messages in the same conversation, then do nothing.   **If there is more than one folder containing messages in the same conversation, then do nothing*. (This extra rule is not necessary if it complicates the solution too much)  Thanks! Determine value of the limit:  $$L=\lim_{n\to \infty}\sqrt[n]{1^2+2^2+\cdots+n^2}$$  My try:  $$1^2+2^2+\cdots+n^2=\frac{n(n+1)(2n+1)}{6}$$  Hence: $$L=\lim_{n\to \infty} \sqrt[n]{\frac{n(n+1)(2n+1)}{6}}=?$$  But, come here, i do not know how, because please help me. Show that the set of all $x$ such that $x \in P$ and $x \notin Q$ exists I have to show that set of all $x$ such that $x \in P$ and $x \notin Q$ exists. So, I think I have to assume that sets $P$ and $Q$ already exist. So, with that, I can use  . This axiom is $$ \forall w_1,\cdots, w_n \, \forall A \,\exists B \,\forall x \left( x \in B \Longleftrightarrow [ x \in A \wedge \varphi(x,w_1, \cdots , w_n, A)] \right) $$ So, I will let $\varphi(x, Q, P) = x \in P \text{ and } x \notin Q $. Also, I will let $A = P$ and  $w_1 = Q $. So using universal instantiation, I get the following $$ \exists B \,\forall x \left( x \in B \Longleftrightarrow [ x \in P \wedge \varphi(x, Q, P)] \right) $$ And using, existential instantiation, there exists a set $B$ such that $$ \forall x \left( x \in B \Longleftrightarrow [ x \in P \wedge \varphi(x, Q, P)] \right) $$ Using the definition of $\varphi(x, Q, P)$, this can be simplified as following $$ \forall x \left( x \in B \Longleftrightarrow [ x \in P \wedge x \in P \wedge x \notin Q] \right) $$ $$ \forall x \left( x \in B \Longleftrightarrow [ x \in P \wedge x \notin Q] \right)$$ $$ \forall x \left( x \in B \Longleftrightarrow x \in \{ x \,| x \in P \text{ and } x \notin Q \} \right)$$ Now, using , it will follow that $$ B = \{ x \,| x \in P \text{ and } x \notin Q \}  $$ And, since $B$ exists, this means that $\{ x \,| x \in P \text{ and } x \notin Q \} $ also exists. Is the proof good ? Proof: Every convergent sequence of real numbers is bounded Question about Casella and Berger's proof of MLE invariance In Casella and Berger, p. 320, they have a proof of the invariance of the MLE. Let $g: \theta \mapsto \eta$ be a function. They define the induced likelihood as  $$ L^*(\eta \mid X) = \sup_{\{\theta: g(\theta) = \eta\}} L(\theta \mid X). $$  This ensures that $g$ is one-to-one with respect to the likelihood functions because if $g$ is not one-to-one, there may be multiple values of $\theta$ that map to a given $g(\theta) = \eta$.  Then they note  $$ \sup_{\eta} L^*(\eta \mid X) = \sup_{\eta} \sup_{\{\theta: g(\theta) = \eta\}} L(\theta \mid X) = \sup_{\theta} L(\theta \mid X). $$  The first equality just applies the definition of the MLE of $\eta$. However, the next inequality confuses me. They write,     The second inequality follows because the iterated maximization is equal to the unconditional maximization over $\theta$...   Can someone justify this claim or provide some intuition if the claim is supposed to obviously follow from definitions? When does the set enter set theory? Double value returns 0 How to apply multiple format to a list Movie: Creature crawls out of its current hosts mouth into next hosts mouth Is there a subtle difference between "somebody" and "someone", "anybody" and "anyone"? Are there any subtle differences between "somebody" and "someone", or can they be used completely interchangeably? Similarly, can you imagine a situation in which you would prefer "anybody" to "anyone" or vice versa? A word for someone who you share a half-sibling with This is probably best explained with an example.  Alice and Bob have a child, Erin. Bob and Carol have a child, Frank. Carol and Dan have a child, Grace. Clearly, Erin and Frank are half-siblings, because of their father, Bob. Similarly, Grace and Frank share their mother, Carol.  Erin and Grace have no parents in common, and are thus not half-siblings. However, is there a term for their relation? How to avoid the 'not properly formatted as code' alert I opened terminal windows and I got a message   your screen size %d%d is bogus. Expect trouble   I closed the terminal and the next time I opened terminal, the message didn't show up.   What is this message and why did I receive it? Why would spacetime curvature cause gravity? "Would" & " Used to" I am struggling to understand this. According to truth tables, if $P$ is false, it doesn't matter whether $Q$ is true or not: Either way, $P \implies Q$ is true.  Usually when I see examples of this people make up some crazy premise for $P$ as a way of showing that $Q$ can be true or false when $P$ is something outrageous and obviously untrue, such as "If the moon is made of bacon-wrapped apple-monkey carburetors, then I am a better wakeborder than Gauss."  $P$ is clearly false, but $P \implies Q$ is true no matter what the state of $Q$ is, and I don't understand why.  Are we saying "If $P$ is false, then all bets are off and $Q$ can be anything, either true or false, and not contradict our earlier claim, and if it isn't false, it must be true"?  Otherwise why can't we say that if $P$ is false, then we can't make any claims one way or the other on whether or not it implies anything at all? Do we know of any living forms on Earth that could continue to live on Mars? How do I find a recursion formula to solve the following question:  In how many sequences of length $n$, with elements from $\{{0,1,2,3,4}\}$, the difference between every 2 adjacent elements is $1$ or $-1$?  I've been trying to solve the problem for the last 5 hours maybe, I'm sure that I'm missing something..   This is a problem in combinatorics, and the solution must be by finding a recursion formula for the problem.   best solution I've come so far is that if we say that $a_n$ is the solution to the question, so let's count how many sequences of size $n-1$ there are that meet the requirement, and we complete the first element to make it a sequence of $n$ elements. so for $n-1$ there $a_{n-1}$ sequences, and for each sequence we have $2$ options to choose the first element (one option is to take a plus $1$ number from the number that start the $n-1$ sequence, and the other option to to take a minus $1$ number from the number that start the $n-1$ sequence), only problem as you figured out is that if the $n-1$ sequnce starts with $0$ or $4$ there is only $1$ option left for the first element in the sequnce.. so $a_n=2a_{n-1}$ won't work.  I think that the solution may involve using $2$ or maybe $3$ recursion formulas.  Hope I was clear enough.