[PATCH] Re: [PULL REQUEST] VPM-B

[Dirk Hohndel]

On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 06:41:03PM +0200, Jan Darowski wrote:
> 2015-08-17 17:54 GMT+02:00 Robert C. Helling <helling at atdotde.de>:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On 17 Aug 2015, at 15:44, Rick Walsh <rickmwalsh at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Which approach is more justified?  Debatable.  The method used by Subsurface
> > should be 'better', but when the depth of the first stop/ceiling is given a
> > special significance thanks to the Boyles law compensation process, I'm not
> > so sure.  The 'instantaneous' ceiling method is more conservative, and,
> > without having modified the code and tested, I'm guessing would produce deco
> > schedules more consistent with other VPM-B programs.
> >
> >
> > I thought a bit about this. To me, it does not make much sense to ascent
> > only if I can „see“ the ceiling is above the next stop and not to ascent as
> > long as we don’t violate the ceiling.
> >
> > On the other hand, one could argue this behaviour is part of the definition
> > of the model and has been tested as such (or otherwise, some of the
> > constants would have to be changed).
> >
> > So maybe the best might be to let the user decide. So here is a patch that
> > adds this as a preferences value (so far without UI, so to test it, you have
> > to set it in the code).
> >
> > On the other hand, we don’t want to confuse the user with too many options.
> >
> > And what is a reasonable default? Set this to false for Buehlmann and to
> > true for VPM-B or maybe even only make this an option for VPM-B?
> >
> > Best
> > Robert
> 
> In my opinion we shouldn't leave this as a preference, it's to
> technical and complicated to explain to most of users. We have the
> conservatism levels already, so users can manipulate how aggressive
> their schedule is.

I agree - I don't think this really is something that should be a user
accessible preference. We should pick the correct value and not expose
this to the user.

false for Buehlmann and true for VPM-B? Does that give us schedules that
match the reference algorithms?

/D