The authors include a line-by-line code review that identifies 30 errors in the published LPI code; though all with much smaller numerical impact than the math issues that receive the focus. (Rev 1: 'I didn't feel it was necessary to review the code because it wouldn't change my assessment.')

While I applaud these authors (& the editor for showing that it is not about getting three yes votes, and publishing the reviews -- well worth the read!), I don't mean to single out the LPI index or rev 1.