pprb raster creating and missing data

[DarthSysmon]

Hi there. Looks like the new toolbox still cannot deal with missing data. Here is a table of four rasters run with the old and new SDM tool, identical model spaces overall.

The one weights table that differs between the models is the aubicu_rc one, which in the new model gets weighted very strongly. The only difference between it and the other weights tables is the presence of a NoData (-99) property.

As calculated, this means that not only does the layer seem to get a very high constrast/stud c, but also a very high rank, more than half the total weights of the model - so undue high influence on the final pprb output.
TestModels_Outcome.xlsx

[trotor]

Hi! Thanks for the report. I hope this will be fixed along with the general nodata error I found - there is no Multioutputmapalgebra function anymore so I need to translate the old functions to rastercalculator. It gives crash on line 400, trying to fix that. First, then will recheck this. T

…

On Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 5:58 AM, Simon Nielsen ***@***.***> wrote: Hi there. Looks like the new toolbox still cannot deal with missing data. Here is a table of four rasters run with the old and new SDM tool, identical model spaces overall. The one weights table that differs between the models is the aubicu_rc one, which in the new model gets weighted very strongly. The only difference between it and the other weights tables is the presence of a NoData (-99) property. As calculated, this means that not only does the layer seem to get a very high constrast/stud c, but also a very high rank, more than half the total weights of the model - so undue high influence on the final pprb output. TestModels_Outcome.xlsx <https://github.com/gtkfi/ArcSDM/files/782250/TestModels_Outcome.xlsx> — You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#16>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AKV5eZdwcq4J597Ws9ikvR0kAXPYRHfQks5rdRrQgaJpZM4MD2ND> .

[trotor]

Hi, this and the crash could be now fixed in 5.00.07 version. We are checking if the calculations come out correctly as this needed some workarounds for missing old functions. i will respond the same in all related bug reports. T

…

On Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 5:58 AM, Simon Nielsen ***@***.***> wrote: Hi there. Looks like the new toolbox still cannot deal with missing data. Here is a table of four rasters run with the old and new SDM tool, identical model spaces overall. The one weights table that differs between the models is the aubicu_rc one, which in the new model gets weighted very strongly. The only difference between it and the other weights tables is the presence of a NoData (-99) property. As calculated, this means that not only does the layer seem to get a very high constrast/stud c, but also a very high rank, more than half the total weights of the model - so undue high influence on the final pprb output. TestModels_Outcome.xlsx <https://github.com/gtkfi/ArcSDM/files/782250/TestModels_Outcome.xlsx> — You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#16>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AKV5eZdwcq4J597Ws9ikvR0kAXPYRHfQks5rdRrQgaJpZM4MD2ND> .

[DarthSysmon]

Still crashing (error 010240) when calculating Missing Data Variance. A model run with no rasters containing NoData values runs fine.

CalculateResponse_No_NoData5.00.09.txt
CalculateResponseCrash5.00.09.txt

[trotor]

This confirmed - for some reason I do get different values from old and new tools. Studying further (linked to #20 - closing one or anohter

[trotor]

This corrected in 5.00.14! Found refactoring error on the code.