Known Bugs: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
mNo edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
* The October 2007 and the November 2007 versions do not evaluate DATA_RANGE= in the CORRECT step. The August 2007 version, and versions since December 2007 do. | * The October 2007 and the November 2007 versions do not evaluate DATA_RANGE= in the CORRECT step. The August 2007 version, and versions since December 2007 do. | ||
* The June and July 2008 versions | * The June and July 2008 versions suffer from a bug in the CORRECT step: the correlation coefficient against a reference data set is always 0.00, and therefore sometimes the wrong decision is made concerning re-indexing of the data. Example taken from CORRECT.LP produced with xds_par: | ||
CORRELATION NPAIR Rmeas COMPARED ESD REINDEX TRANSFORMATION | CORRELATION NPAIR Rmeas COMPARED ESD REINDEX TRANSFORMATION | ||
| Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
* 0.89 5960 25.1 53803 1.65 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 | * 0.89 5960 25.1 53803 1.65 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 | ||
0.06 5960 25.1 53803 1.65 1 1 0 0 -1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 | 0.06 5960 25.1 53803 1.65 1 1 0 0 -1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 | ||
For me, xds_par produced the problem, but not xds. | |||
This is fixed in XDS versions starting September 2008. | |||
Revision as of 12:07, 10 September 2008
- The October 2007 and the November 2007 versions do not evaluate DATA_RANGE= in the CORRECT step. The August 2007 version, and versions since December 2007 do.
- The June and July 2008 versions suffer from a bug in the CORRECT step: the correlation coefficient against a reference data set is always 0.00, and therefore sometimes the wrong decision is made concerning re-indexing of the data. Example taken from CORRECT.LP produced with xds_par:
CORRELATION NPAIR Rmeas COMPARED ESD REINDEX TRANSFORMATION
0.00211818312 25.1 53803 1.65 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0
* 0.00260052808 25.1 53803 1.65 1 1 0 0 -1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0
whereas xds produces the correct output:
CORRELATION NPAIR Rmeas COMPARED ESD REINDEX TRANSFORMATION
* 0.89 5960 25.1 53803 1.65 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0
0.06 5960 25.1 53803 1.65 1 1 0 0 -1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0
For me, xds_par produced the problem, but not xds.
This is fixed in XDS versions starting September 2008.