deletions | additions       diff --git a/Methodology Indicator Time Space.tex b/Methodology Indicator Time Space.tex  deleted file mode 100644  index 5c8443b..0000000  --- a/Methodology Indicator Time Space.tex  +++ /dev/null 
...
\subsection{Indicator comparison over time and space}  Indicator distributions are generally shaped like Gamma distributions across the literature \cite{Ismail_2010} \cite{Autey_2012} \cite{St_Aubin_2013}. Quantifying collision risk based on TTC is the remaining puzzle piece. TTC $t_{threshold}$ has been somwhat popular \cite{Svensson_2006}, though introduce assumptions in the model. One recent approach proposed a shifted gamma-generalised Pareto distribution model \cite{Zheng_2014}. In the meantime, some qualitative analysis is possible in some circumstances, for example with a continuous mass shift of a probability distribution function as demonstrated in Figure~\ref{fig:distro-comparison}. This approach has been tried in some early applications of the methodology, e.g. in \cite{Ismail_2010}, \cite{Autey_2012}, and in \cite{St_Aubin_2013}. Figure~\ref{fig:distro-comparison} also demonstrates three different TTC distribution aggregation methods as used to represent nearly 3 million TTC observations over the course of one day at a single site: i) all interaction instances (subject to over-smaling by slower road users and longer corridors), ii) minimum value of time series per user pair, or iii) 15th percentile value of time series per user pair. The 15th percentile is a practical solution to ignoring outliers that may be introduced by maxima.  diff --git a/layout.md b/layout.md  index 9e0d537..509404b 100644  --- a/layout.md  +++ b/layout.md 
...
figures/relation_timeseries/relation_timeseries.png  figures/TTC_timeseries/timeseries.png  Methodology Measures PET.tex  Methodology Indicator Time Space.tex  figures/distribution comparison/distribution comparison.png  Methodology Tools & Techniques.tex  figures/undistort/undistort.png