Different results using SMath 097.5737 and 097.5890

Welcome Guest! To enable all features please Login. New Registrations are disabled.

Notification

Error

User Name or E-Mail Address:

Password:

Different results using SMath 097.5737 and 097.5890 - Plotting data preparation.

Options

Previous Topic Next Topic

Davide Carpi		#1 Posted : 20 February 2016 03:22:11(UTC)
Rank: Advanced Member Groups: Registered, Advanced Member Joined: 13/01/2012(UTC) Posts: 2,648 Location: Italy Was thanked: 1329 time(s) in 875 post(s)		Hello Ioan, I confirm the different behavior in the 2 versions. In the latest, there is a minus sign change in the interpolated points of xθs; you should investigate the math to see if it was wrong before and you didn't noticed because the minus bug in augment/submatrix or if the math is correct and this is a new bug about the signs. Removing all the minus from stack/augment in θtd, θθx, θv I get the correct interpolation (but in this moment I'm a little bit tired and I'm not sure if I have broken the math or some sign convention). Solution testCBSmath.sm (1,293kb) downloaded 14 time(s). Edited by user 23 April 2016 12:11:44(UTC) \| Reason: Not specified
		If you like my plugins consider to support SMath Studio buying a plan; to offer me a coffee: paypal.me/dcprojects

1 user thanked Davide Carpi for this useful post.		on 20/02/2016(UTC)
User Profile View All Posts by User View Thanks


	Wanna join the discussion?! Login to your SMath Studio Forum forum account. New Registrations are disabled.

Jean Giraud		#2 Posted : 20 February 2016 07:12:34(UTC)
Rank: Guest Groups: Registered Joined: 04/07/2015(UTC) Posts: 6,866 Was thanked: 981 time(s) in 809 post(s)		Salut Ioan, Big stuff ! The 2nd plot turns red "Arrays dimension do not match" The sign errors look coming from your Interp that is incompletely defined. It does same as the Smath built-in "linterp(X,Y, point)"

1 user thanked Jean Giraud for this useful post.		on 20/02/2016(UTC)
User Profile View All Posts by User View Thanks

Jean Giraud		#3 Posted : 20 February 2016 18:50:18(UTC)
Rank: Guest Groups: Registered Joined: 04/07/2015(UTC) Posts: 6,866 Was thanked: 981 time(s) in 809 post(s)		Thank you "Gurus" ... no more red in 5346. As it looks, it solved earlier version(s) Snow job today ... Québec is a two seasons country: Winter & July . The largest snow flake [Colorado] 20 cm diameter !!! Quite a pancake, just add maple sirup. Cheers Collabs, Jean

1 user thanked Jean Giraud for this useful post.		on 20/02/2016(UTC)
User Profile View All Posts by User View Thanks

Andrey Ivashov		#4 Posted : 20 February 2016 19:22:45(UTC)
Rank: Administration Groups: Developers, Registered, Knovel Developers, Administrators, Advanced Member Joined: 11/07/2008(UTC) Posts: 1,616 Was thanked: 1978 time(s) in 666 post(s)		Ioan, thank you for your research. As I understood you see differences in calculations between two SMath Studio versions just because of one of the latest changes (in 5890): Originally Posted by: Andrey Ivashov SS-2292: Symbolic calculation error of augment(...) and submatrix(...) functions fixed (happened sometimes when matrices in arguments were negative); So, I expect now your calculations is absolutely correct. Best regards. Edited by user 20 February 2016 19:24:19(UTC) \| Reason: Not specified
		WWW
2 users thanked Andrey Ivashov for this useful post.		on 20/02/2016(UTC), on 20/02/2016(UTC)
User Profile View All Posts by User View Thanks

Users browsing this topic
Guest

Forum Jump

You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.