Talk:Gradient descent: Difference between revisions
→Needs more information: More comment.
(→Needs more information: Further comments.) |
(→Needs more information: More comment.) |
||
Line 31:
::::Yes, to get consistent results, the answer does seem to be to use Fortran's gradient function.
::::I just substituted that in the Go code and obtained results of: x[0] = 0.10762682432948055, x[1] = -1.2232596548816101 which now agrees to 6 decimal places with the Fortran, Julia and your Algol 68 and Algol W solutions. So I'm going to update the Go example on the main page and suggest that those who've previously translated it update their translations accordingly. Thanks for your efforts here. --[[User:PureFox|PureFox]] ([[User talk:PureFox|talk]]) 13:14, 3 September 2020 (UTC)
:::::Thought I'd just add that Wren is now falling into line with updated results of: x[0] = 0.10762682432948, x[1] = -1.2232596548816. Perhaps my Math.exp function isn't so bad after all :) --[[User:PureFox|PureFox]] ([[User talk:PureFox|talk]]) 13:59, 3 September 2020 (UTC)
== promoted from draft? ==
| |||