Increase numerical stability of poles for a barycentric model - #22
Merged
Conversation
Codecov Report✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests. 📢 Thoughts on this report? Let us know! |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Since generalized
eigvals(E, B)is missing for high-precision floats, we can implement it ourselves using a complex Schur decomposition. This greatly improves the accuracy of thepolescalculation, as per the test case in #21 (comment). Fixes #21.This PR does reorder the poles. Does RFA make implicit guarantees about this ordering?
Apart from this PR, Issue #21 identifies some strange behaviors in
approximatewith fixed poles. But that seems less pressing.