Talk:BOP tuning
Typos
There are 12 instances of "n/d" on this page which probably were all intended to be "nd". I cannot make these changes myself, though; the page is locked to admins only. So if an admin could take care of it, I would appreciate it. --Cmloegcmluin (talk) 05:22, 13 April 2022 (UTC)
- These all occur in sopfr () since it's supposed to take a multiplicative interval, right? FloraC (talk) 21:54, 14 April 2022 (UTC)
- They don't all occur as part of sopfr expressions, no. I think the others should be changed too for things to work out correctly. --Cmloegcmluin (talk) 22:51, 14 April 2022 (UTC)
- Your changes on your user page version look good to me. Thanks. --Cmloegcmluin (talk) 20:19, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
- Sorry. I debated including a clause in my previous comment along the lines of, "We somehow have a different way of counting these errors, but you nonetheless managed to make the changes I wanted", but I left it out at the last second because I thought it was better just to be simple and straightforward, and also I couldn't figure out how to get my wording just right so the tone couldn't be misconstrued as anything other than gracious. That choice did not pay off, though, as it resulted in confusing you. Hopefully now my position is clear. And again, thanks for your attention to this. --Cmloegcmluin (talk) 23:54, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
Wilson height, not Wilson tuning
I believe where the page says "it is also optimal using the Wilson tuning" it means to say "it is also optimal using the Wilson height", because the "it" here seems to refer to "BOP tuning".
The fact that it is formatted as a link might also suggest that it was meant to link to the Wilson height article, which does exist.
And if a "Wilson tuning" existed, according to the article, it'd be the same as BOP tuning, and so the link would be a redirect to the page itself, and thus pointless.
I cannot make the change because I'm not an admin. If an admin could take care of this fix, I would appreciate it. --Cmloegcmluin (talk) 16:58, 14 April 2022 (UTC)
Add link to D&D's guide
This tuning is discussed extensively in D&D's guide to RTT, here: Dave Keenan & Douglas Blumeyer's guide to RTT: alternative complexities#Sum-of-prime-factors-with-repetition. This article should have a link to that section, and should at least note that the systematic name for it is minimax-sopfr-S. But I can't add this myself because the article has been locked to non-admins. --Cmloegcmluin (talk) 19:26, 6 February 2023 (UTC)
Add link to BE tuning
BOP tuning is closely related to BE tuning, its Euclideanized variant, and should be linked to the page discussing it under that name: Tenney-Euclidean_tuning#Benedetti-Euclidean_tuning. But I can't add that link myself, since the page has been locked to non-admins. --Cmloegcmluin (talk) 19:28, 6 February 2023 (UTC)
I'm just posting here as a reminder to admins about this and the above two requests, in case they all missed them the first time. --Cmloegcmluin (talk) 22:58, 6 May 2023 (UTC)