Re: Reasonable limits
Posted by Roger Hunter on April 04, 2002 at 16:54:04:

Yes, I know.

The numbers you proposed would have made it worse.

Currently the program looks for anything within +- 3 windows in time, up to 10 times the radius in space and any magnitude at all. The search radius is increased in 10% increments for probability calculations since one does not predict exact values for things.

But I get too many hits to compute in a reasonable time (in some cases) so I need a weed-out routine. I can't do it without a major rewrite because right now it remembers everything and does probability last and I run out of memory at about 400 quakes.

Always something....

Roger


Follow Ups:
     ● Re: Reasonable limits - 2cents  17:43:15 - 4/5/2002  (14666)  (1)
        ● Re: Reasonable limits - Roger Hunter  17:57:37 - 4/5/2002  (14668)  (0)
     ● Re: Reasonable limits - michael  17:12:44 - 4/4/2002  (14608)  (1)
        ● Re: Reasonable limits - Roger Hunter  18:10:51 - 4/4/2002  (14613)  (1)
           ● Re: Reasonable limits - Cathryn  19:18:42 - 4/4/2002  (14619)  (1)
              ● Re: Reasonable limits - Roger Hunter  05:49:53 - 4/5/2002  (14634)  (1)
                 ● Re: Reasonable limits - Mary C.  09:00:44 - 4/5/2002  (14638)  (1)
                    ● Re: Reasonable limits - Roger Hunter  10:29:32 - 4/5/2002  (14641)  (1)
                       ● Re: Reasonable limits - Cathryn  20:55:51 - 4/5/2002  (14672)  (1)
                          ● Re: Reasonable limits - Roger Hunter  04:41:04 - 4/6/2002  (14679)  (0)