On 20 May 2010 07:05, Olaf Till <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 01:09:07PM +0200, Olaf Till wrote:
>> dfdp does not cope well with the mentioned inaccuracy in bounds, I'll
>> try to fix that soon. It's probably also better to correct the
>> parameters to the bounds after each step, but only if no constraints
>> except bounds are specified.
>
> Both done. You might want to test the new version (in SVN).
>
> Olaf
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Octave-dev mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/octave-dev
>

Thanks Olaf,

Sorry for taking so long to get back to you - I've not had much time
to work on this recently.

In my test run, the svn version (1.0.13) respects bounds for all calls
to the fitting function. In the same run with optim-1.0.12, the bounds
were violated and no further optimisation could be done. However, when
I worked around the violation of bounds by passing the absolute values
of the parameters to the external program, optimisation continued and
convergence was reached. This no longer happens in 1.0.13; when the
bound is set, the parameter remains at the bound value.

I believe it's possible that this is an issue specific to my problem,
but I just wanted to let you know.

I haven't tried scaling the parameters yet, but plan to do so.

Gary

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

_______________________________________________
Octave-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/octave-dev

Reply via email to