Open
Conversation
Owner
|
Thanks for taking the time to diagnose the timestep scaling issue. Feel free to test with data if needed to get more verifiable results. I had a query. Should the approach in #7 work alongside this PR to reduce the high mean error, instead of being a seperate approach? cc: @florianmattana |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Applied the fix removing ts from the Q scale computation. Here are the results:
The mean difference barely moved, but the max dropped from 1.69 to 1.37. It seems ts was causing spikes on specific values rather than a uniform error across the board. That makes sense since ts only distorts the scale factor, and the impact depends on how far each value is from the tile's max.
Let me know if we merge this first or should instead work on the data itslef