In some unrealted development, Claude happened to identify what may be some "randomness" in sigproc due to FFT instability.
One source arises in an ill-advised double configure which I hope to not have to keep while the other seems more inherent.
When we get some free cycles, or if this manifests in a real world program, hopefully people find this issue and dig deeper.
Here's the message from Claude:
- ±2 ADC in ≲0.02% of samples: systematic from double-configure() on AnodePlane/WireSchemaFile in shared mode. These components store
floating-point geometry; re-parsing produces sub-LSB differences that propagate through OmnibusSigProc's Wiener filter.
- ±1 channel: one channel sits right at OmnibusSigProc's sparse=true threshold; tiny differences from the above tip it in or out. Not a physics
difference
In some unrealted development, Claude happened to identify what may be some "randomness" in sigproc due to FFT instability.
One source arises in an ill-advised double configure which I hope to not have to keep while the other seems more inherent.
When we get some free cycles, or if this manifests in a real world program, hopefully people find this issue and dig deeper.
Here's the message from Claude:
floating-point geometry; re-parsing produces sub-LSB differences that propagate through OmnibusSigProc's Wiener filter.
difference