Hello, I have a question about whether there is a way around the following problem. If I take different linear combinations of the same vector I should get the same vector as a result. However, applying the linear combination adds some almost-0 error which then implies that the two are not the same…

it’s expected, it’s Float number precision, you should use \approx

0.1, 0.2, 0.8, and 0.9 cannot be expressed exactly in floating point. If you change to x = rand(100); v1 = 0.25*x + (1-0.25)*x; v2 = 0.5*x + (1-0.5)*x; println(maximum(abs.(v1 .- v2))) you’ll get what you expect because 0.25 and 0.5 can be expressed exactly. This will be true in any language usin…

Machine Precision ... and 0 in Julia

General Usage

rdeits July 9, 2020, 4:59am 3

For a nice write-up of this, see PSA: floating-point arithmetic

Topic		Replies	Views
Float representation of the same number may not be equal? General Usage question	10	995	November 19, 2019
Approx with a weird behaviour General Usage	1	388	January 16, 2019
Incorrect summation of Float64 General Usage	8	914	January 23, 2023
Float comparison error General Usage	4	1277	June 19, 2018
Precision and adding General Usage	5	696	December 11, 2017

Machine Precision ... and 0 in Julia

Related topics