| Re: MPFITFUN AND PARINFO [message #48761 is a reply to message #48702] |
Thu, 18 May 2006 14:32   |
Craig Markwardt
Messages: 1869
Registered: November 1996
|
Senior Member |
|
|
JJMeyers2@gmail.com writes:
> Thank you Graig for the response and the fitting routines of course!
> It works fine now.
>
> I would like to ask you how MPFITFUN handles the case when both parinfo
> and start_parms are set. Does start_parms take precedent over parinfo?
I'm confused, since I answered that question in the previous post.
However, if one reads the documentation, one finds,
; START_PARAMS - ...
; This parameter is optional if the PARINFO keyword
; is used (but see PARINFO). The PARINFO keyword
; provides a mechanism to fix or constrain individual
; parameters. If both START_PARAMS and PARINFO are
; passed, then the starting *value* is taken from
; START_PARAMS, but the *constraints* are taken from
; PARINFO.
> What happens in the case that start_parms and parinfo are in conflict?
> For example if start_parms=[2,1] and parinfo(1).limited(0)=1,
> parinfo(1).limits(0)=2.
Of course you could try it and find out :-)
An error message is returned. You might get one of these errors:
errmsg = 'ERROR: parameters are not within PARINFO limits'
errmsg = 'ERROR: PARINFO parameter limits are not consistent'
Craig
--
------------------------------------------------------------ --------------
Craig B. Markwardt, Ph.D. EMAIL: craigmnet@REMOVEcow.physics.wisc.edu
Astrophysics, IDL, Finance, Derivatives | Remove "net" for better response
------------------------------------------------------------ --------------
|
|
|
|
comp.lang.idl-pvwave archive
Members
Search
Help
Login
Home
