Closed ultrach closed 3 years ago
Hi, Its a bug in BP normalization. I have updated the BP solver as well as the BP example.
Sorry for the inconvenience and the late reply.
Hi. Thank you for your kind support. pyEIT is a great help to me.
@ultrach It would be great if you cited our article in your research, haha.
If I have an oppotunity, I'll gradly do that. By the way, the opposite protocol(el_dist=8, n_el=16) for bp solver result is still weired. TT
Yeah, you can not assign n_el=16
if the total number of electrode is 16, in this way, the two nodes of voltage meter is a=i
, b=(i+16)%16=i
, which is the same electrode.
Hi.
I tested the example "eit_dynamic_bp.py". It runs well at the default setting, but if I change the scanning conditions,
el_dist, step = 1, 1 ==> el_dist, step = 8, 1
the result is weird like as below.![Figure_1](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/46465238/105936328-d16eea00-6096-11eb-8e2b-97d07ccdc60c.png)
Does the BP solver not support the opposite stimulation protocol? or Is there anything i am missing?
Thank you in advance.