On 2016-12-08 16:17, Pierpaolo Bernardi wrote:
On Thu, Dec 8, 2016 at 11:54 PM, Brian Inglis <Brian.Inglis@systematicsw.ab.ca> wrote:
That paper is *not* a summary of the results of the same research: it is adapted from the 10 year old Canon partly based on some of the same authors' results from 2 years earlier, as the year in the URI indicates! You are right! I stand corrected. I saw the same authors on whose research this reference that I knew is based, and assumed it was the same work without checking the new paper.
No worries - thought that might be case - didn't want possibly spurious ref cited as a summary in distributed files - URI year made me suspicious - those guys have published a fair amount on the same topics over the decades - seem like pretty rigorous treatments - Canon/NASA summary polynomials appeared less uniform than the authors' current tables. -- Take care. Thanks, Brian Inglis, Calgary, Alberta, Canada