Difference between revisions of "Talk:Opasnet base structure"

From Testiwiki
Jump to: navigation, search
m (Talk:Opasnet base moved to Talk:Opasnet Base structure: The variable is about the structure. There should be an encyclopedia article about the Base itself.)
m (Talk:Opasnet Base structure moved to Talk:Opasnet base structure: Consistency in naming regarding capital letters in page names)
(No difference)

Revision as of 04:59, 21 April 2009

Should all variables go to result distribution database?

How to read discussions

Statements: Not all variables should go to the result distribution database

Resolution: Resolution not yet found.

(A stable resolution, when found, should be updated to the main page.)

Argumentation:

1 P There should be two levels of variables: 1) The results of important variables are uploaded in the result database, and they should be coherent with each other. 2) Other variables that are less important are used in case-specific assessments. They don't need to be coherent with all variables in the result database, only with those within the same assessment. --Jouni 23:52, 20 August 2007 (EEST)

--2 P: How do you define an important variable? I see variable importance as a varying aspect, not absolute and often case-specific. --Anna Karjalainen 14:17, 7 May 2008 (EEST)
3: There is no separation to important and less important variables. There are only variables, and they are described in Opasnet. All these also go to the Opasnet Base. Some variables are in an early developmental stage and there is nothing to put to the Base yet, but this does not change the principle. However, there are also intermediate nodes in models that are not described as variables. They do not go into the Base. --Jouni 08:22, 21 February 2009 (EET)