New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

autocut: relative cut contribution function implicitly assumes a certain number of total cuts #39

Closed

kuadrat opened this issue Jun 10, 2024 · 1 comment

Labels

bug

Owner

kuadrat commented Jun 10, 2024

The number of cuts assumed in the regression by Petersen et al. is not evident but looks to be around 4-5.
However, the given percentage fractions should be scaled by n_cuts/n_cuts_ref.
This means that n_cuts is a parameter to get_target_biomass, which implies some reordering in the autocut code.

Besides, for the sake of code clarity, it would be good to separate out put all autocut related stuff.

The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:

kuadrat added the bug label

Owner Author

kuadrat commented Aug 29, 2024

Autocut has been separated out in 84ecc27 and the issues above are indirectly addressed with the new PhenologicalAutocut introduced in 2252629.

kuadrat closed this as completed

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment