For both the predicted sets you proposed (with both the Original values and zeros) I found the same output in R. ` [1] 3.5749952 0.7434548 5.1731669 10.0840800 12.3966908 9.1834888 6.8067145 [8] 9.9246630 5.9426798 16.0056136

This shows that the values of C are irrelevant. Furthermore, test.set$c provides you with: [1] 3.952410 1.443177 5.924198 10.296560 12.268170 9.725431 5.625797 9.597326 [9] 6.503896 16.037176

which is inherently different from the predicted output. This leads me to believe that your code is in fact correct.

For both the predicted sets you proposed (with both the Original values and zeros) I found the same output in R.

[1]  3.5749952  0.7434548  5.1731669 10.0840800 12.3966908  9.1834888  6.8067145
[8]  9.9246630  5.9426798 16.0056136

This shows that the values of C are irrelevant. Furthermore, test.set$c provides you with:

[1]  3.952410  1.443177  5.924198 10.296560 12.268170  9.725431  5.625797  9.597326
[9]  6.503896 16.037176

which is inherently different from the predicted output. This leads me to believe that your code is in fact correct.