data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/d1daa/d1daad3d1813a7e396b298deebe0c8557afa8fc4" alt=""
This resurrected from a Rembrandt K post on TOD:
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/fba0c/fba0c253c56863a4d2eac1f8a65cab8fb8596dc4" alt=""
And this from a Khebab post on TOD:
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/fa30c/fa30ce8b95ff307916e3458d2768d132ca0e2f7b" alt=""
And finally the classic reference profile:
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/fc8be/fc8be1292f147609faade4f23906f7212cf44b7b" alt=""
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/db545/db545c2420403a0121999d7ed3ad21c0f1f24377" alt=""
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/3835b/3835b9654e15128b80f2517efd4b7330ec1b6207" alt=""
The differences between these curves result primarily from different amounts of filtering. The top one appears to sum up cumulative in each decade, resulting in a more-or-less symmetric bias. However the second has a fairly severe lagged moving average, resulting in the discovery peak shifting right quite a bit. The third shows little by way of filtering and includes superimposed backdating results. The fourth has a 3-year moving average, which I believe came from the unfiltered fifth curve due to Laherrere. I haven't found where I dug up the last curve from.
I figure instead of filtering the data via moving averages, it might make more sense to combine discovery data from different sources and use that as a noise reduction/averaging technique. Ideally I would also like to use a cumulative but that suffers a bit from not having any pre-1900 discovery data.