Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Strange behaviour when working with clusters #22

Open
weidenfreak opened this issue May 10, 2015 · 3 comments
Open

Strange behaviour when working with clusters #22

weidenfreak opened this issue May 10, 2015 · 3 comments
Assignees
Labels

Comments

@weidenfreak
Copy link

Hi,

I think I encountered a bug in the cluster algorithm. I have a grid like the one shown in the screenshot below:

screen shot 2015-05-10 at 12 39 02

When I plot a normal bertin everything is fine. But if a want to draw a clustered version (either with cluster or bertinCluster) one of the constructs ("trustworthy - mysterious") (no kidding...) disappears and instead the construct "passive - interactive" appears twice but one time in a converted form.
screen shot 2015-05-10 at 12 54 34

If I remove the "passive - interactive" construct then the "trustworthy - mysterious" appears again and everything works as expected.

Here's a gist with the file I'm using: https://gist.github.com/weidenfreak/5b2f3c7f7fb599d4ec6c

@markheckmann
Copy link
Owner

Well, yes that is indeed a "mysterious" bug 😄

@markheckmann markheckmann self-assigned this May 11, 2015
@markheckmann
Copy link
Owner

There is a problem in the internal OpenRepGrid:::align function. I always had doubts the quick-and-dirty approach I used in it was 100% sound. But now, due to the structure of your data, I can see that it is not. Unfortunately, there is no quick fix and I need to dig into into when I have more time.

Note, that the results turn out okay, if you slightly modify one cell in the data, e.g. x[1, 1] <- 2. If you tolerate this slight change before clustering (it won't change the structure too much I suppose), this may server as a quick-and-dirty work-around.

@weidenfreak
Copy link
Author

No worries! I ended up clustering my data slightly different so it doesn't influence my work. It only seems to happen in very specific cases so I thought it would be helpful to report the bug with my initial data anyway.

Thanks for looking into it so quickly!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants