[time-nuts] ADEV vs. OADEV
magnus at rubidium.dyndns.org
Fri Jan 23 04:03:57 EST 2009
Tom Van Baak skrev:
>> Trouble is, the algorithm Tom and Ulrich wants to denote OAVAR others
>> have already denoted AVAR, thus causing ambiguity.
> One can equally say the algorithm you now want to call simply
> "AVAR" others long before you chose to call "overlapping AVAR"
> in order to clearly distinguish it from the pre-existing label that
> you no longer even want to call "AVAR".
I think you missed my point... I didn't want to call it that. I notice
that it is already called AVAR.
> Personally I prefer to call it AVAR/ADEV when the implementation
> isn't relevant; and in those cases when it is, I specifically qualify
> the name with something like "normal" vs. "overlapping". That
> removes the ambiguity regardless of historical interpretation.
This is a good resolution. I would rather prefer "normal" being replaced
with "original" or something as the context would select which is the
"normal" one, which is a subjective matter.
The definition actually does not result in a particular algorithm (which
popular beleif seems to imply), so one has to be carefull in putting
judgement or preference in the prefix.
> We've beat this to death now and all understand the issues, yes?
I think this particular issue is beaten pretty dead by now. I at least
picked up a few important lessons. I hope others did too.
More information about the time-nuts