Am 06.10.2017 um 16:01 schrieb Allin Cottrell:
On Fri, 6 Oct 2017, Sven Schreiber wrote:
> Could it be that the "almonp" variant was overlooked
> I have a case here with a term mdsl(dIPL, "almonp", theta1) which
> works OK like this, but which fails if I remove the explicit 'theta1'
> in there.
> With the other spec cases it works fine.
The point here is that as things stand we're not willing to guess how
many terms you want in your Almon polynomial (while with NEAlmon and
beta there's a clear presumption of two parameters as default).
Right, that's reasonable of course!