Table 7.

Parameter estimation results from the pressure-based CF (pCF), compared to the energy-based CF (eCF)

Case	${\mathit{\alpha }}^{pCF}$	${C_1}^{pCF}$	${\mathit{\alpha }}^{pCF}-{\mathit{\alpha }}^{eCF}$	${C_1}^{pCF}-{C_1}^{eCF}$
Synth	30	1000	0	0
PC1	18	21630	$-$43	16330
PC2	6	8335	$-$55	7515
PC3	$>{120}^{\mathrm{a}}$	<885${}^{\mathrm{a}}$	>54${}^{\mathrm{a}}$	<$-$1075${}^{\mathrm{a}}$
PC4	50	240	45	$-$4540
PC5	60	1070	36	$-$2070
PC6	130	275	101	$-$1185
PC7	>400${}^{\mathrm{a}}$	<210${}^{\mathrm{a}}$	>334${}^{\mathrm{a}}$	<$-$3090${}^{\mathrm{a}}$
HC	50	310	45	$-$1390

Note that $C_1$ here is obtained in both cases by the L${}^2$ displacement norm

${}^{\mathrm{a}}$ Results in PC3 and PC7 are bounded since the passive inflation simulation for larger $\mathit{\alpha }$ values did not converge