You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
This works out as long as this condition for calculating log_delta_q is met as the calculations for n_low and n_high also use the inverse term appropriately. However, if this condition is not met, then log_delta_q is calculated by: log_delta_q = log(10.) / DEFAULT_POINTS_PER_DECADE
or log_delta_q = log(10.) / points_per_decade
which are no longer the inverse term. This would result in an incorrect calculation of n_low and n_high.
I noticed that the log_delta_q is calculated as the inverse of the equation listed in the documentation:
This works out as long as this condition for calculating log_delta_q is met as the calculations for n_low and n_high also use the inverse term appropriately. However, if this condition is not met, then log_delta_q is calculated by:
log_delta_q = log(10.) / DEFAULT_POINTS_PER_DECADE
or
log_delta_q = log(10.) / points_per_decade
which are no longer the inverse term. This would result in an incorrect calculation of n_low and n_high.
For example:
@pkienzle can you confirm I am understanding intended functionality correctly? I think this issue would pre-date this PR.
Originally posted by @caitwolf in #563 (comment)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: