Return to Question

table

I have a table describing piecewise functions, with the gradients, intercepts, and the bounds detailed. I am trying to obtain an exact value for an arbitrary grade (which has decimals, if that adds to anything). The problem here is that the bounds don't have the same sizes and so I can't describe the boolean range like: 0 < {upper bound} - {value} <= {size}. If I want to describe it like that, I will have to go for: {lower bound} < {value} <= {upper bound}, which in and of itself is okay, except that the formula is monstrously long and painful to look at if I were to use IFS with this very table because of how many conditions I have (an example here), and I feel like this is very inefficient. How do I go around this issue?

• Tried using "MEDIAN" but that only works if the value is exactly in the middle of the bounds. This is not the case.
• Tried using "ROUNDUP", "ROUNDOWN", "MROUND", but as I mentioned earlier, the bounds don't have a constant size, so the formula doesn't work all the way down.

I have a table describing piecewise functions, with the gradients, intercepts, and the bounds detailed. I am trying to obtain an exact value for an arbitrary grade (which has decimals, if that adds to anything). 

The problem here is that the bounds don't have the same sizes and so I can't describe the boolean range like: 0 < {upper bound} - {value} <= {size}. If I want to describe it like that, I will have to go for: {lower bound} < {value} <= {upper bound}, which in and of itself is okay, except that the formula is monstrously long and painful to look at if I were to use IFS with this very table because of how many conditions I have

An example here

I feel like this is very inefficient. How do I go around this issue?

• Tried using "MEDIAN" but that only works if the value is exactly in the middle of the bounds. This is not the case.
• Tried using "ROUNDUP", "ROUNDOWN", "MROUND", but as I mentioned earlier, the bounds don't have a constant size, so the formula doesn't work all the way down.

table

I have a table describing piecewise functions, with the gradients, intercepts, and the bounds detailed. I am trying to obtain an exact value for an arbitrary grade (which has decimals, if that adds to anything). The problem here is that the bounds don't have the same sizes and so I can't describe the boolean range like: 0 < {upper bound} - {value} <= {size}. If I want to describe it like that, I will have to go for: {lower bound} < {value} <= {upper bound}. This in and of itself is okay, except that the formula is monstrously long and painful to look at if I were to use IFS (an example here), and I feel like this is very inefficient. How do I go around this issue?

• Tried using "MEDIAN" but that only works if the value is exactly in the middle of the bounds. This is not the case.
• Tried using "ROUNDUP", "ROUNDOWN", "MROUND", but as I mentioned earlier, the bounds don't have a constant size, so the formula doesn't work all the way down.

table

I have a table describing piecewise functions, with the gradients, intercepts, and the bounds detailed. I am trying to obtain an exact value for an arbitrary grade (which has decimals, if that adds to anything). The problem here is that the bounds don't have the same sizes and so I can't describe the boolean range like: 0 < {upper bound} - {value} <= {size}. If I want to describe it like that, I will have to go for: {lower bound} < {value} <= {upper bound}, which in and of itself is okay, except that the formula is monstrously long and painful to look at if I were to use IFS with this very table because of how many conditions I have (an example here), and I feel like this is very inefficient. How do I go around this issue?

• Tried using "MEDIAN" but that only works if the value is exactly in the middle of the bounds. This is not the case.
• Tried using "ROUNDUP", "ROUNDOWN", "MROUND", but as I mentioned earlier, the bounds don't have a constant size, so the formula doesn't work all the way down.

table

I have a table describing piecewise functions, with the gradients, intercepts, and the bounds detailed. I am trying to obtain an exact value for an arbitrary grade (which has decimals, if that adds to anything). The problem here is that the bounds don't have the same sizes and so I can't describe the boolean range like: 0 < {upper bound} - {value} <= {size}. If I want to describe it like that, I will have to go for: {lower bound} < {value} <= {upper bound}. This in and of itself is okay, except that the formula is monstrously long and painful to look at if I were to use IFS (an example here), and I feel like this is very inefficient. How do I go around this issue?

• Tried using "MEDIAN" but that only works if the value is exactly in the middle of the bounds. This is not the case.
• Tried using "ROUNDUP", "ROUNDOWN", "MROUND", but as I mentioned earlier, the bounds don't havea constant size, so the formula doesn't work all the way down.

table

I have a table describing piecewise functions, with the gradients, intercepts, and the bounds detailed. I am trying to obtain an exact value for an arbitrary grade (which has decimals, if that adds to anything). The problem here is that the bounds don't have the same sizes and so I can't describe the boolean range like: 0 < {upper bound} - {value} <= {size}. If I want to describe it like that, I will have to go for: {lower bound} < {value} <= {upper bound}. This in and of itself is okay, except that the formula is monstrously long and painful to look at if I were to use IFS (an example here), and I feel like this is very inefficient. How do I go around this issue?

• Tried using "MEDIAN" but that only works if the value is exactly in the middle of the bounds. This is not the case.
• Tried using "ROUNDUP", "ROUNDOWN", "MROUND", but as I mentioned earlier, the bounds don't have a constant size, so the formula doesn't work all the way down.