ratio-by-grid
Drawn at its defaults, in the ratio, across a rung. It takes no options at all, so every essay calling it gets this exact drawing.
Called by 3 essays
the blast radius of changing it
The survey loses its second outcome
The specification written one phase ago names three results the survey could return, and the second — a ratio near or above 1.30, read as evidence against the placement rule — is the one that would have been worth publishing. It does not survive this phase. The ratio moves with where the plant sits between two transitions, and it moves again with the colour of the plant's own disturbance.
Stems and conesThe ratio was the floor of a curve
The last phase left one number standing between a placement rule and a transported disturbance, measured at one rise, with the explanation that the geometry there happens to favour the larger parastichy number. Swept across two rungs the number is a U — a floor of about 0.79 two thirds of the way up a rung, climbing past 2.8 as a transition approaches — and the geometry is flat exactly where the curve is steepest.
Stems and conesThe grid was in the number
The rule places each organ at the least of a profile sampled at a fixed number of azimuths, and every flat run on this site samples 384 of them — a step of 0.94°, against a disturbance of a quarter of a degree. The quantisation is the larger of the two, it is white, and it moves the discriminator from 0.79 to 0.62. The convergence study the last phase asked for, in the place it turned out to matter.