"Relative size" calculation disagrees with paper

[ISSOtm]

The paper states that the relative size of a tile on a page is ∑[s∈t] (1 ∕ µ_p(s)), but the Python code instead does ∑[s∈t] (1 ∕ (1 + µ_p(s))), which seems more reasonable given that it doesn't divide by 0 if a symbol is nowhere to be found in the page.

pagination/code/solver_tools.py

Line 66 in 7a43308

return sum(F(1,1+batch.weightBySymbol.get(symbol,0)) for symbol in self)

Nevertheless, the two disagree!