https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=501831
Alexander Semke <alexander.se...@web.de> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Resolution|--- |INTENTIONAL
Status|REPORTED |RESOLVED
--- Comment #9 from Alexander Semke <alexander.se...@web.de> ---
(In reply to realkpavel from comment #8)
> (In reply to Alexander Semke from comment #7)
> > (In reply to realkpavel from comment #5)
> > > (In reply to Alexander Semke from comment #4)
> > > > (In reply to realkpavel from comment #2)
> > > > > Created attachment 179661 [details]
> > > > > File where the histogram problem occurs
> > > > >
> > > > > Hello,
> > > > > attaching the file where I noticed this. Hope this helps. If I can
> > > > > help any
> > > > > other way, please let me know.
> > > >
> > > > Thank you!
> > > >
> > > > Which data did you use to reproduce this problem? I'm looking now at
> > > > Rsheet
> > > > from the LongStructures/Resistance spreadsheet the maximum is at 30.6849
> > > > here. To what value did you increase the maximum to see this problem?
> > >
> > > All three histograms show this. In the one labeled "Resistance", the
> > > transition is at the high end (28.972 -> 28.973), In Rsheet it is 30.6849
> > > ->
> > > 30.6850, in Rcontact it is 1.08622 -> 1.08623. In addition, changing the
> > > bin limits of Rcontact LongStructures/Worksheet breaks the binning change
> > > behavior of Rcontact (if you change the limits of Rsheet, then change the
> > > limits of Rcontact, the graph of Rcontact sometimes disappears)
> >
> > ok, I see it now. The behavior is correct since the convention used in GSL
> > and also in LabPlot is to define the last bin with strict < and not with <=.
> >
> > From GSL's documentation in
> > https://www.gnu.org/software/gsl/doc/html/histogram.html:
> >
> > "Thus any samples which fall on the upper end of the histogram are excluded.
> > If you want to include this value for the last bin you will need to add an
> > extra bin to your histogram."
> >
> > We'll add more tooltip texts in LabPlot in this area to explain this
> > behavior and to also properly document it in the documentation on
> > https://docs.labplot.org/
> >
> > Can you please check and confirm this behavior on your side, too?
>
> Yes, that is the behavior I am seeing. A tooltip would certainly help.
>
> I understand the convention, it makes the bin widths the same
> mathematically, but I would disaggre with it if I was designing the system
> (since the default behavior guarantees one sample will be hidden, which will
> skew the data a lot in case of low sample numbers like here). But that is of
> course not my choice to make. Thank you for the work you're putting into
> this.
Yes, there are reasons for this convention and it's also used in other
applications. We documented this topic in
https://invent.kde.org/education/labplot/-/issues/815 and also ideas for how to
improve here in future, just in case you're interested.
I added now more explanations in the tooltip texts in
https://invent.kde.org/education/labplot/-/commit/bad05b36358dcf287e19528eaf3b7c6647766049.
This will be part of the next release 2.12 that I hope we can do soon.
Thank you again for the confirmation and for raising our attention to this
topic again!
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.
