On Thu, 11 Nov 2021 10:18:29 GMT, Laurent Bourgès <lbour...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> I attempted to explore a numerical approach to pad the bounding box here >> 4b9d87d6d03e923bb2663fc8f4f77b7549df6e70 ... but I don't like the results so >> far. Any suggestions? (Or if you have a better approach in mind we can >> discard that entire class...) > > You made an amazing job ! > Your bigdecimal impl looks good. > I will play with your test experiment... asap. > I think numerical accuracies are related to the dynamic /magnitude of values: > points. > The test should evaluate(max error) depending on the quick length(curve) ~ > manhattan norm(curve arms), so small curves have less numerical error whereas > huge curve (10^50 length) means points are wide spread and coeffs... > solver...points are less accurate. > > I will try making sampled control points vary in log scale: 10^-6 to 10^38 > (float max) so curve length will vary in huge range and determine the > histogram of max(error) / length ratio. see condition number = magnitude range on such plot: https://github.com/JuliaMath/AccurateArithmetic.jl/blob/master/test/figs/sum_accuracy.svg ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/6227
