commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ajo Fod <ajo....@gmail.com>
Subject Re: inverseCumAccuracy is probably not necessary
Date Tue, 06 Aug 2013 20:52:42 GMT
My question is if it is like one of those buttons on a calculator that no
one has really ever used.

I've used the random number generator to get repetable paths, and the
parameters, but never the inverseCum. So, how many people need the
parameter at all?

Cheers,
-Ajo


On Tue, Aug 6, 2013 at 1:23 PM, Paul Benedict <pbenedict@apache.org> wrote:

> I wonder how many were waiting in silence to see if someone else would
> speak up for a rename.
>
>
> On Tue, Aug 6, 2013 at 3:16 PM, Matt Benson <gudnabrsam@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Actually I think by "function name" he was referring to the unfortunate
> > English-language sexual innuendo incurred by the abbreviation of the word
> > "cumulative" in the method name.
> >
> > Matt
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Aug 6, 2013 at 2:27 PM, Phil Steitz <phil.steitz@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > > On 8/6/13 10:00 AM, Konstantin Berlin wrote:
> > > > Terrible function name also :)
> > >
> > > Can you suggest a better name for this parameter?  It is meant to
> > > indicate the proscribed accuracy of the inverse cumulative
> > > probability.  By "function name" I assume you are talking about the
> > > name of the constructor parameter / configuration option.
> > >
> > > Phil
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Aug 6, 2013 at 10:28 AM, Ajo Fod <ajo.fod@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> When does this become an issue?
> > > >>
> > > >> -Ajo
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> On Sun, Aug 4, 2013 at 9:42 AM, Phil Steitz <phil.steitz@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >>> On 8/4/13 7:44 AM, Ajo Fod wrote:
> > > >>>> Guys,
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> What is the use of inverseCumAccuracy when people want to
> > instantiate
> > > >> an
> > > >>>> AbstractRealDistribution with a random generator?
> > > >>>> org.apache.commons.math3.distribution.AbstractRealDistribution<
> > > >>
> > >
> >
> http://commons.apache.org/proper/commons-math/apidocs/org/apache/commons/math3/distribution/AbstractRealDistribution.html
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> I personally only seem to need to instantiate these objects
with a
> > > >>>> RandomGenerator but never with the inverseCumAccuracy set
to
> > anything
> > > >> but
> > > >>>> DEFAULT_INVERSE_ABSOLUTE_ACCURACY.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> Could we be better of with inverseCumAccuracy moved to another
> > > >>> constructor?
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Good point.  We should take a careful look at which implementations
> > > >>> actually use this parameter and remove it from constructors for
> > > >>> those that don't.  I think some used to use it, but do not any
> > > >>> longer - in particular the ones that no longer rely on the default
> > > >>> inverse cum provided by AbstractRealDistribution.  The default
impl
> > > >>> uses a solver to directly invert the cdf and that is what this
> > > >>> parameter is used for.  For the ones that do use it, it would
also
> > > >>> be convenient to provide constructors that include distribution
> > > >>> parameters + random generator without this parameter.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Phil
> > > >>>> Thanks,
> > > >>>> Ajo.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> > > >>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > >
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
> > >
> > >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Cheers,
> Paul
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message