Kristian Agasøster Haaga
Kristian Agasøster Haaga
In principle, I don't see why we could have complexity measures that return something else than a scalar. However, I haven't read about this before and would need to dive...
> I argue we should revert the measure to be a complexity measure instead, and keep the note at the end that this can be generalized but one needs to...
Just quickly did some calculations. We can easily define e.g. Tsallis-type "self information" or "information content", analogous to the Shannon-type information content. The same goes for many of the other...
> Yes, but this sounds like a research paper to me. If someone published this shannon fluctuation information, someone can publish the generalization. But do we restrict measures implemented here...
> I'm taken aback that we didn't fix this before the paper... Better now than never, though
> yeah, we don't, and it probably isn't too complex to extract the unit of information for each measure. I'm just saying that if you do, you might as well...
For the failing tests: I guess the result of `unique(res)` must be sorted?
Ok, then I'll probably just write up the paper myself as soon as possible. If you want to have a read, give me a nod here, and I'll send you...
> i also see countless calls to deprecated functions in the test suite. Oh man, i think I have to invest some time in the tests... It's because we also...
The tests for ordinal patterns fail now because they were designed for cases with no random shuffling in the case of ties. Just need to pass on the correct function...