You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
The accompanying paper (https://arxiv.org/pdf/1906.03821.pdf) notes the SR part of the algorithm is extending the series by taking the gradient between the last observed point and the 'm' prior points.
The extend_series method to the SpectralResidual class is calculating the extension to the series as:
The -look_ahead-2:-1 slice is passing the 6th to last to 2nd to last values to the predict_next method. This seems to stand in constrast to formula 8 in the paper, that indicates the average gradient used in the prediction is calculated by comparing the last observation with the prior 5 observations.
Wouldn't the predict_next method be comparing the 2nd to last value to the its prior five values as coded?
It seems like values[-look_ahead - 1:] would fit more with the description in the paper by passing the last observed value and the prior 5 values to the function.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
The value at the last position is to be detected, so its value is not used to extend the series. The predict_next method uses value before it to predict a value for the last position.
The accompanying paper (https://arxiv.org/pdf/1906.03821.pdf) notes the SR part of the algorithm is extending the series by taking the gradient between the last observed point and the 'm' prior points.
The extend_series method to the SpectralResidual class is calculating the extension to the series as:
extension = [SpectralResidual.predict_next(values[-look_ahead - 2:-1])] * extend_num
The -look_ahead-2:-1 slice is passing the 6th to last to 2nd to last values to the predict_next method. This seems to stand in constrast to formula 8 in the paper, that indicates the average gradient used in the prediction is calculated by comparing the last observation with the prior 5 observations.
Wouldn't the predict_next method be comparing the 2nd to last value to the its prior five values as coded?
It seems like values[-look_ahead - 1:] would fit more with the description in the paper by passing the last observed value and the prior 5 values to the function.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: