[PATCH] User-manual: heat map

[Willem Ferguson]

On 26/10/2016 09:48, Rick Walsh wrote:
>
>
> On 26 October 2016 at 18:18, Willem Ferguson 
> <willemferguson at zoology.up.ac.za 
> <mailto:willemferguson at zoology.up.ac.za>> wrote:
>
>     Subject: [PATCH 2/2] [PATCH] User-manual: Heat map
>
>     1) Replace the existing graphics for explaining the heat map.
>     2) Update the text for explaining the heat map.
>     These changes with substantial input from Rick Walsh.
>
>     Rick and Robert,
>     Comments or changes, please?
>
> Thanks Willem for persisting with this.  The changes look good.
>
> For the image D (e.g. section of heatmap), could you take a screenshot 
> of the that covers the point of a dive where you get the image A (e.g. 
> bar graph)?  Then crop the heatmap to get the exact data point, and 
> use that as image C (colour mapping of A, e.g. bar graph)
>
> The comparison between the deep stop vs no deep stop dive profiles 
> should be updated/replaced.  The correction to how the heatmap is 
> plotted (using lines rather than large dots), and the adjustments to 
> the colour scale, mean that it is no longer how the heatmaps would 
> look.  A replacement could be made from doctoring a real dive, like I 
> did for the current version, or could be done with the planner using 
> the same gasses, depth and bottom dive with a Buhlmann (e.g GF60/75) 
> and VPM-B plan (e.g. +2).  For the comparison to be fair, the GF and 
> conservatism needs to be adjusted so the total dive time needs to be 
> the same.  I'm not sure when I'll next get a chance to make a new version.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Rick
Rick,

Thanks very much for the feedback.
Top diagram no problem. I will manipulate the gas pressure histogram to 
match a column in the heat map.

Regarding the bottom diagram, I would rather want to leave that for 
someone else. The reason is that I am approaching Simon Mitchell's 
interpretation with caution. I am keeping a sharp eye on developments 
but I am not persuaded yet. Main reasons are twofold: 1) His 
interpretation that I have seen comes from one single experiment in the 
USA where the measuring unit was the presence or absence of DCS: no 
Doppler or other physiological measurements were made in that 
experiment. 2) His conclusion that gas loading in the SLOW tissues 
contributes to DCS. This is counterintuitive, for instance in our 
understanding of isobaric counterdiffusion where the effects on FAST 
tissues is important in contributing to DCS. There is no physiological 
explanation that I have heard of why the slow tissues specifically 
should contribute to DCS and not the fast tissues, given our present 
assumptions of the off-gassing process. Mark Powell discusses several 
DAN-based experiments that purport the advantages of bubble models. 
These are the main reasons I have not been convinced yet. Also, Bühlmann 
and VPM-B dives need to be compared in terms of bubble characteristics 
(i.e. the currency of the VPM-B algorithm) and simple comparisons of 
inert gas loading may not give the whole picture. So, I am not the best 
person to reconstruct the bottom diagram.

AI would appreciate any comments, suggestions or insults very much.

Kind regards,
willem

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.subsurface-divelog.org/pipermail/subsurface/attachments/20161026/83d0ce6e/attachment-0001.html>