[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Bug-gsl] gsl_sf_coupling_3j bug report
From: |
Brian Gough |
Subject: |
Re: [Bug-gsl] gsl_sf_coupling_3j bug report |
Date: |
Wed, 12 Oct 2011 14:37:11 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Wanderlust/2.15.6 (Almost Unreal) Emacs/23.3 Mule/6.0 (HANACHIRUSATO) |
At Wed, 12 Oct 2011 00:15:08 -0400,
Alexey A. Illarionov wrote:
> I just want to emphasize that the Grigory's patch does not solve the
> problem it only extends a little bit range of possible j and m where
> algorithm gives reasonable answer. For example,
> (200 200 200)
> (-10 60 -50) = 2.55804e+18 +- 1.35857e+17
> while the correct answer would be approximately
> 7.4939e-4
Thanks, I understand. Any patches for the large/asymptotic cases
appreciated.
- [Bug-gsl] gsl_sf_coupling_3j bug report, Grigory I. Rubtsov, 2011/10/01
- Re: [Bug-gsl] gsl_sf_coupling_3j bug report, Alexey A Illarionov, 2011/10/02
- Re: [Bug-gsl] gsl_sf_coupling_3j bug report, Grigory I. Rubtsov, 2011/10/01
- Re: [Bug-gsl] gsl_sf_coupling_3j bug report, Alexey A. Illarionov, 2011/10/01
- Re: [Bug-gsl] gsl_sf_coupling_3j bug report, Grigory I. Rubtsov, 2011/10/02
- Re: [Bug-gsl] gsl_sf_coupling_3j bug report, Alexey A. Illarionov, 2011/10/02
- Re: [Bug-gsl] gsl_sf_coupling_3j bug report, Brian Gough, 2011/10/10
- Re: [Bug-gsl] gsl_sf_coupling_3j bug report, Alexey A. Illarionov, 2011/10/12
- Re: [Bug-gsl] gsl_sf_coupling_3j bug report,
Brian Gough <=
Re: [Bug-gsl] gsl_sf_coupling_3j bug report, Brian Gough, 2011/10/07