If .ageTick is greater than 1, mature/tick (min-max) has the correct meaning, but if .ageTick is less than 1, the minimum value is equal to the .mature and the maximum value is infinity.
Of course, it will not take such an extreme value unless we select it manually with multiple windows etc. However, the minimum and maximum values when .ageTick is greater than 1 could be also extreme values. The currently displayed values would be the guideline values, but is there no need to supplement it?
If .ageTick is less than 1, they are not at least the minimum and maximum values at correct meaning.
The definition of M(t) above is acually the probability of age >= mature age at tick t, which means the probability shown above including the decay situation. The probability of Juicy Queenbeet being mature but not decay at tick t is M(t)-D(t)=[0.451275, 0.453937, 0.456582, 0.459211, 0.461821, 0.464413] for t=[1058, 1059, 1060, 1061, 1062, 1063] respectively.
The differece is especially large when mature age is close to 100, e.g., Juicy Queenbeet and Duketater. Not sure if these details is important enough to put on the wiki page.
Maybe it is a good idea to upload the figure M(t)-D(t), D(t) versus t for each plant?
140.112.54.158, I think your calculation is very precious. In this wiki, you can create a separate table that is usual closed on this page. There is also a mathematical page Random list mechanism. If you aim to post them again, I think that the latter is better. When you create them as a figure, you can use it on both pages. By the way, it seems that it was calculated by mistaking ageTickR of White mildew and Brown mold (8 --> 12), how many ticks 90/95/99% of maturity and withering are respectively?
Saying more, the expected values (ticks) of maturity and death on significance level for 10% / 5% / 1% themselves might be different from the gist of the Random list mechanism. However, the actual new variants' probability in each mating condition are different from the probabilities to push into mutation lists (Base Chance). Then that sense as well, I think that creating a Garden chapter in the Random list mechanism is sufficiently meaningful.
(Edited by Jackopoid)
0
A Fandom user·
Jackopoid wrote: 140.112.54.158, I think your calculation is very precious. In this wiki, you can create a separate table that is usual closed on this page. There is also a mathematical page Random list mechanism. If you aim to post them again, I think that the latter is better. When you create them as a figure, you can use it on both pages. By the way, it seems that it was calculated by mistaking ageTickR of White mildew and Brown mold (8 --> 12), how many ticks 90/95/99% of maturity and withering are respectively?
First, as you said the numbers for White mildew and Brown mold are wrong. The actual numbers should be mature/90%/95%/99% = 6/6/7 and decay/90%/95%/99% = 9/9/9. I am surprised that you actually figure out the wrong ageTickR I used. Did you write your own program to reproduce all the numbers?
Second, I don't think the Random list mechanism is a right page for these numbers to place. (But the probability of new mutation definitely belongs to this page since it follows the same logic.) Maybe spawing mechanism is a better choice, since the page also involves the probability that changes with time. Or maybe these numbers deserve their own page. I don't know.
(Edited by A Fandom user)
0
A Fandom user·
How do you crossbreed the plants? I don't understand how you do it.
Jackopoid wrote: 140.112.54.158, I think your calculation is very precious. In this wiki, you can create a separate table that is usual closed on this page. There is also a mathematical page Random list mechanism. If you aim to post them again, I think that the latter is better. When you create them as a figure, you can use it on both pages. By the way, it seems that it was calculated by mistaking ageTickR of White mildew and Brown mold (8 --> 12), how many ticks 90/95/99% of maturity and withering are respectively?
First, as you said the numbers for White mildew and Brown mold are wrong. The actual numbers should be mature/90%/95%/99% = 6/6/7 and decay/90%/95%/99% = 9/9/9. I am surprised that you actually figure out the wrong ageTickR I used. Did you write your own program to reproduce all the numbers?
Second, I don't think the Random list mechanism is a right page for these numbers to place. (But the probability of new mutation definitely belongs to this page since it follows the same logic.) Maybe spawing mechanism is a better choice, since the page also involves the probability that changes with time. Or maybe these numbers deserve their own page. I don't know.
I did not verify the whole values by programming. Since the value of Age / Tick was 8 ageTickR instead of 12, I guessed that the number of ticks at 90/95/99% probability would be wrong as well. I thought that the written values would exceed 3 σ. Although it is not an accurate way of saying because it may not become a normal distribution unless the number of ticks is logarithmic etc.
I understood the assertion that the place where your calculation results should be written is not the page of Random list mechanism. I think that the article lost in the place to write should be written in Garden provisionally.
Either way, it may be rare for this wiki, but I think it will be a description of the meaning of "verification" or "discussion". You proved that the rough averages shown in the game took close values also by the refinement method, and as for the exact probability of the mating I suggested, a few representative breeding conditions could be topics.
I will pay a certain respect for those who are familiar with wiki and who are editing and improving vigorously, but I can not admire the act of picking up promising buds while in articles with the stub template. I think that there is still no need for an editor who serves as Wardlichen in Garden article.
That will be a huge amount of information. Is not it better to publish data with Google spread sheet or Excel once?
(Edited by Jackopoid)
0
A Fandom user·
Jackopoid wrote: That will be a huge amount of information. Is not it better to publish data with Google spread sheet or Excel once?
I do not understand what you mean by "huge amount of information". The information of these numbers will be clear once they are presented by a scatter plot. Do you think it is too much to show 34 mature/decay figures? How about poping these figures when hovering the mouse over the column "mature age" of the table "Plant Growth Chart"?