From aa17e207a8e867a28d3f05c9fe0aa2a68fdf9316 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: "W. Trevor King" Date: Sun, 5 May 2013 15:03:16 -0400 Subject: [PATCH] calibcant/discussion.tex: Fix 'florian95' -> 'florin95' typo --- src/calibcant/discussion.tex | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/calibcant/discussion.tex b/src/calibcant/discussion.tex index 700a183..721edbd 100644 --- a/src/calibcant/discussion.tex +++ b/src/calibcant/discussion.tex @@ -17,8 +17,8 @@ where $x_0$ sets the center and $\Gamma$ sets the width of the curve. It is unclear whether the references are due to uncertainty about the definition of the Lorentzian or to the fact that \cref{eq:model-psd} is also peaked and therefore \cref{eq:lorentzian} a potential -substitute for \cref{eq:model-psd}. \citet{florian95} -likely \cref{are} using \cref{eq:lorentzian}, as the slope of the +substitute for \cref{eq:model-psd}. \citet{florin95} +likely \emph{are} using \cref{eq:lorentzian}, as the slope of the fitted \PSD\ in their figure 2, has a slope at $f=0$. Using \cref{eq:model-psd}, the derivative would have been zero, as we can see by using the chain rule repeatedly, -- 2.26.2