Mike's suggestion in the paper review is to use exact powers of 2 for equilibrating matrices instead of 10^4 (which we currently use). This would avoid the equilibration process itself introducing numerical noise from numbers (10^4) not being exactly invertible in double precision. I think an appropriate replacement would be either 2**13 or 2**14
I don't think this would change the output (so it's not urgent), but it would be good to change at some point.
Mike's suggestion in the paper review is to use exact powers of 2 for equilibrating matrices instead of
10^4(which we currently use). This would avoid the equilibration process itself introducing numerical noise from numbers (10^4) not being exactly invertible in double precision. I think an appropriate replacement would be either2**13or2**14I don't think this would change the output (so it's not urgent), but it would be good to change at some point.