
28 Feb
2006
28 Feb
'06
9:31 a.m.
Henning Thielemann wrote:
Maybe you should use a kind of convex combination, that is
(x-oldLower)*a + (oldUpper-x)*b
Maybe lower*(1-z) + upper*z where z = (x-oldLower) / (oldUpper-oldLower). I think this will always map oldLower and oldUpper to lower and upper exactly, but I'm not sure it's monotonic. -- Ben