LunaSare / LunaSare/datelife_examples
how to deal with conflicting calibrations?
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- R
- Stars
- 0
- Forks
- 0
- PR merge metrics
- No merged PRs in 30d
Description
Conflicting calibrations occur when we have calibrations for nodes closer to the tips that are older than calibrations of nodes closer to the roots.
This occurs sometimes bc of differences in sampling in source chronograms.
Dating software deals with this in different ways
- BLADJ does not care much, as long as there is a calibration for the root
- pathd8 quietly gives up, so we expand calibrations or summarize them. The latter seems to work more often.
In the examples:
- show when we have conflicting calibrations and which ones are those
Contributor guide
No contributing guide indexed for this repository
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
Research direction
Start by locating the examples that handle calibration data and review how calibrations closer to the tips are compared with those closer to the roots. Add an example that visibly identifies conflicting calibrations and specifies which calibrations conflict; use the existing example workflow to verify the result.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- r
- Domain
- documentation
- Issue type
- Feature
- Difficulty
- 3/5
- Estimated time
- 1-2 days
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Mostly clear
- Newbie friendliness
- 38/100