Good evening GIN&PEZ;
I believe I have had a second epiphany, and I believe I am getting close in my understanding of your project.
I first respectfully suggest that I hold you accountable in part for the difficulty of following the segmented approach of your presentation. This is a subjective (not personal) but technical criticism for the following:
1) Insufficient information is provided in many of your posts to alert a reader to your concerns, questions, suggestions, or criticisms without first navigating to one or more of the embedded links.
2) Our statements are not always translated in precise coordination with our intentions, making it difficult for a reader to be motivated to follow the links as a pre-requisite to comprehending the post.
3) Understanding a post that necessitates toggling back and forth through various links interrupts the reader who is required to divert their attention toward the task of navigating previous posts, and documents.
4) Short logically organized contextually segmented posts are convenient and efficient when engaged 1 to 1. It is uninviting, confusing, or convoluted to potentially beneficial contributors who stumble upon the thread in passing.
I will now dispense with the subjective criticism and return to the task of interpreting and understanding your results.
I have consumed your final report 1 and final report 2; and I find them to be consistent with my understanding to this point. I have also gone back and reviewed our previous exchanges, and I believe I am very close to capturing the objectives of your project.
The above leaves me with the following comments and questions;
1) The graphical data in final report 2 appears excellent as I would anticipate. it is however simply a pair of graphs.
2) Neither final report 1, nor final report 2, nor both of them combined, is insufficient to be termed a final report. I suspect this to be another translational issue, as I have subjectively described at the beginning of this post.
3) The origin, conditions, and requirements of the tests and environment supporting the data is required as a condition of giving it meaning. I assume this is forthcoming, but there is no hint of a final report #3 or a final final report, including a summarized conclusion.
I am encouraged and cautiously optimistic at where I am with my understanding, and hopeful that your findings are at least as well articulated as your series of 5 publications on this topic.
I will be staying tuned.