Cosmetic changes.

prob_laplace.m

@@ -15,8 +15,8 @@ csvwrite('ML_9_1.csv', [T1.x; T1.sol]);
 
 
 T2 = Ternary_model(0, 'FRAP', {-0.1, b(7/3, 10^-12), 0.9, 0,...
-                                     -0.895, 1, 300, 7, 0, 'Constituent', 0},...
-                                     t, 1);
+                               -0.895, 1, 300, 7, 0, 'Constituent', 0},...
+                               t, 1);
 T2.x = T1.x;
 T2.solve_tern_frap();
 csvwrite('ML_1_9.csv', [T2.x; T2.sol]);
@@ -84,9 +84,10 @@ Gi = 1;%(1-Tpt1.phi_t(1))/(1-Tpt1.phi_t(1));
 Go = Tpt1.phi_t(end)/Tpt1.phi_t(1)*2;
 %%
 for i = 1:1%length(prec)
-    Tga1(i) = Ternary_model(2, 'FRAP', {-1, b(7/3, 10^-12), Tpt1(i).phi_t(1), 0,...
-                                     -0.83, Gi, 300, 7, 0, 'Constituent'},...
-                                     t, prec(i));
+    Tga1(i) = Ternary_model(2, 'FRAP', {-1, b(7/3, 10^-12), Tpt1(i).phi_t(1),...
+                                        0, -0.83, Gi, 300, 7, 0,...
+                                        'Constituent'},...
+                            t, prec(i));
     Tga1(i).x = Tpt1(i).x;
     Tga1(i).solve_tern_frap();
 end
@@ -128,7 +129,8 @@ c = {'g', 'm', 'k', 'r'};
 for i = 1:3%length(T_prec)
 %     T_prec(i).plot_sim('plot', 1, c{i})
 % Is this the right normalization? %/T_prec(i).phi_t(1)
-    plot(T_prec(i).x, T_prec(i).sol'/T_prec(i).phi_t(1), c{i}); axis([0, 20, -inf, 1]);
+    plot(T_prec(i).x, T_prec(i).sol'/T_prec(i).phi_t(1), c{i});
+    axis([0, 20, -inf, 1]);
 end
 axis([0, 2, 0, 1])
 %% Same precisions, different starting positions