Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Excel maintains 15 figures in its numbers, but they are not always accurate; mathematically, the bottom line should be the same as the top line, in 'fp-math' the step '1 + 1/9000' leads to a rounding up as the first bit of the 14 bit tail '10111000110010' of the mantissa falling off the table when adding 1 is a '1', this up-rounding is not undone when subtracting the 1 again, since there is no ...
The check digit is calculated by (()), where s is the sum from step 3. This is the smallest number (possibly zero) that must be added to s {\displaystyle s} to make a multiple of 10. Other valid formulas giving the same value are 9 − ( ( s + 9 ) mod 1 0 ) {\displaystyle 9-((s+9){\bmod {1}}0)} , ( 10 − s ) mod 1 0 {\displaystyle (10-s){\bmod ...
Verhoeff had the goal of finding a decimal code—one where the check digit is a single decimal digit—which detected all single-digit errors and all transpositions of adjacent digits. At the time, supposed proofs of the nonexistence [6] of these codes made base-11 codes popular, for example in the ISBN check digit.
This system detects all single-digit errors and around 90% [citation needed] of transposition errors. 1, 3, 7, and 9 are used because they are coprime with 10, so changing any digit changes the check digit; using a coefficient that is divisible by 2 or 5 would lose information (because 5×0 = 5×2 = 5×4 = 5×6 = 5×8 = 0 modulo 10) and thus ...
Similarly, formulas expressed in terms of cell addresses are hard to keep straight and hard to audit. Research shows that spreadsheet auditors who check numerical results and cell formulas find no more errors than auditors who only check numerical results. [63] That is another reason to use named variables and formulas employing named variables.
Any non-linear differentiable function, (,), of two variables, and , can be expanded as + +. If we take the variance on both sides and use the formula [11] for the variance of a linear combination of variables (+) = + + (,), then we obtain | | + | | +, where is the standard deviation of the function , is the standard deviation of , is the standard deviation of and = is the ...
The earliest reference to a similar formula appears to be Armstrong (1985, p. 348), where it is called "adjusted MAPE" and is defined without the absolute values in the denominator. It was later discussed, modified, and re-proposed by Flores (1986).
In computing, a roundoff error, [1] also called rounding error, [2] is the difference between the result produced by a given algorithm using exact arithmetic and the result produced by the same algorithm using finite-precision, rounded arithmetic. [3]