<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN">
<html><body>
<p>Michel,</p>
<p>I'm not sure we understand your question. 2e-14 and -2e-14 differ by only 0.0000000000004 if I counted my zeroes correctly. And an error with a magnitude of e-14 is not a great choice for an error function. That falls well within precision of the variables...</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Jeff</p>
<p> </p>
<div>
<pre>---<br />Jeff Thornton
President - TESS LLC
3 N. Pinckney Street, Suite 202, Madison WI USA 53703
Office: (608) 274-2577 Fax: (608) 278-1475
www.tess-inc.com
E-Mail: thornton@tess-inc.com
</pre>
</div>
<p>On 11/10/2018 4:33 pm, Michel Tamarzians via TRNSYS-users wrote:</p>
<blockquote type="cite" style="padding-left:5px; border-left:#1010ff 2px solid; margin-left:5px"><!-- html ignored --><!-- head ignored --><!-- meta ignored -->
<div dir="ltr">
<div>Dear all,</div>
<div> </div>
<div>When doing an optimization one of the minimum results is positive 2.1E-14 but another minimum result is negative 2.1E-14. Can someone please elaborate why the results changes to negative while the minimum found is already much smaller than zero..??</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Thank you :)</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Kind regards, </div>
<div>Michel</div>
</div>
<br />
<pre>_______________________________________________
TRNSYS-users mailing list
<a href="mailto:TRNSYS-users@lists.onebuilding.org">TRNSYS-users@lists.onebuilding.org</a>
<a href="http://lists.onebuilding.org/listinfo.cgi/trnsys-users-onebuilding.org">http://lists.onebuilding.org/listinfo.cgi/trnsys-users-onebuilding.org</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
</body></html>