You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
I noticed this problem when writing tests for the new numpy-based performant Ripley statistics. When using a shapely polygon's convex hull, I was getting basically the correct intensity, but when I was using scipy, I was getting extreme overestimates of the intensity.
I narrowed it down to an issue with how scipy.spatial.ConvexHull.area works scipy/scipy#12290.
Depending on the fix there we need to either:
move to using hull.volume when getting the area from a scipy convex hull if upstream decides to adopt docstring clarifications
keep using area if upstream decides to adopt the proposed changes for area/volume of 2-d shapes.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
I noticed this problem when writing tests for the new
numpy
-based performant Ripley statistics. When using a shapely polygon's convex hull, I was getting basically the correct intensity, but when I was usingscipy
, I was getting extreme overestimates of the intensity.I narrowed it down to an issue with how
scipy.spatial.ConvexHull.area
works scipy/scipy#12290.Depending on the fix there we need to either:
hull.volume
when getting the area from a scipy convex hull if upstream decides to adopt docstring clarificationsarea
if upstream decides to adopt the proposed changes for area/volume of 2-d shapes.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: