<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Recent posts to Using plgriddata</title><link>https://sourceforge.net/p/plplot/discussion/132889/thread/e8753cc28d/</link><description>Recent posts to Using plgriddata</description><atom:link href="https://sourceforge.net/p/plplot/discussion/132889/thread/e8753cc28d/feed.rss" rel="self"/><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Tue, 18 Nov 2025 10:31:41 -0000</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://sourceforge.net/p/plplot/discussion/132889/thread/e8753cc28d/feed.rss" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><item><title>Using plgriddata</title><link>https://sourceforge.net/p/plplot/discussion/132889/thread/e8753cc28d/?limit=25#fe73</link><description>&lt;div class="markdown_content"&gt;&lt;p&gt;I have some sparse data (FWHM values) which I am sending into plgriddata, in this case using GRID_NNLI, 1.001f. When I look at the values in the data versus the output grid, I see:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;FWHM Min: 1.75532  Max: 7.24468&lt;br/&gt;
zg Min: 2.64953 zg Max: 3.795&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;I've tried various nn.... algorithms, but none appear to preserve the actual minima and maxima.   Is that to be expected.   I had rather hoped that the actual data points that I do have would be (close to) preserved.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Guidance will be much appreciated.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/div&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Dave Partridge</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 18 Nov 2025 10:31:41 -0000</pubDate><guid>https://sourceforge.net65cc292f4fa2d969eabad0d4d4d278f7ffec859e</guid></item></channel></rss>