Re: [chrony-dev] [GIT] chrony/chrony.git branch, master, updated. 1.25-pre1-18-g20a4340

[Miroslav Lichvar <mlichvar@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 09:19:47PM -0700, Bill Unruh wrote:
> I will try to write this up and send it to you (have a colloquium to give
> tomorrow, so it might take a day or two).

Ok, thanks.

> But the fact that the current
> precedure leads to and instability and in particular can badly underestimate
> the value of the variances meand that I think for now it would be a good idea
> to go back to the original and to look at this problem more deeply. I do agree
> that using sigma is better, but the procedure at present simply does not work,
> and I cannot see a simple fix. Anything simple seems to leave the system
> unstable.

Even the very latest code which uses the unweighted variance? I
haven't seen any problem with it yet.

> >Skew and hi/lo are from the sd of the slope, which I believe wasn't
> >affected by this problem, only variance and sd of the intercept.
> 
> Since the variance of the slope is directly related to the variance of the
> values, it is also affected.