Skip to content

Conversation

@meiyasan
Copy link
Contributor

Hello @rgommers ,

I had many issues in controlling the precision of the wavelet (def wavefun()). This issue has been mentioned several times already, but never committed. I think this is a rather important fix allowing for more flexibility in playing with CWT.

So please find the minimal modification necessary allowing for better precision and removing artifacts in the low-frequency region (high scale values).

Please consider if possible, this is important parameter to adjust. In the current master, the value is hardcoded in _cwt.py to precision=10, this is not so good.

@meiyasan meiyasan changed the title Update _cwt.py Improve flexibility of the precision parameter in the CWT implementation. Apr 12, 2025
Copy link
Collaborator

@agriyakhetarpal agriyakhetarpal left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks, @meiyasan! Not a maintainer over here, but I think the change looks good in its current form.

@meiyasan
Copy link
Contributor Author

meiyasan commented May 4, 2025

Hello @rgommers, can you consider merging this ?

@meiyasan
Copy link
Contributor Author

meiyasan commented Jul 7, 2025

@rgommers ?

@rgommers rgommers modified the milestone: v1.9.0 Aug 3, 2025
@rgommers
Copy link
Member

rgommers commented Aug 3, 2025

Thanks @meiyasan. Sorry for the delay, this package is in low-maintenance mode unfortunately.

This PR aims to do the same thing as gh-570. The docs are better on gh-570, the default and argument order are better in this PR. What I'll do is cherry-pick this commit on top of what's in this PR, fix things up and merge that. I'll close this PR once that is done.

@rgommers
Copy link
Member

rgommers commented Aug 3, 2025

the default and argument order are better in this PR

Actually not quite for the default value. In gh-531 it's discussed that it's good to increase the default value, and gh-570 does that. It wasn't exposed before and values should get more accurate only, so it's backwards compatible.

I just updated gh-570, so I'll close this. Thank you for the contribution though @meiyasan!

@rgommers rgommers closed this Aug 3, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants