explanation for is_sufficiently_precise calculation in drive details?

[Kosta-Github]

Describe the bug

I am trying to figure out why the second row does not show the consumption and efficiency values:

Expected behavior

I would have expected that consumption and efficiency values to be available for both rows.

How to reproduce it (as minimally and precisely as possible):

What is this boolean expression trying to model:

duration_min > 1 AND distance > 1 AND ( 
  start_position.usable_battery_level IS NULL OR end_position.usable_battery_level IS NULL	OR
  (end_position.battery_level - end_position.usable_battery_level) = 0 
) as is_sufficiently_precise

In my case:

type	value
start_usable_battery_level	48
start_battery_level	49
end_usable_battery_level	44
end_battery_level	45

Why is it required that end_usable_battery_level equals end_battery_level to show a value here?

[Kosta-Github]

Suggestion: why not just use the avg of both values for the start and end levels?

diff = (end_battery_level - start_battery_level + end_usable_battery_level - start_usable_battery_level) / 2

[BabyYeggie]

This was added due to the battery showing an increase in range when it warms up. The average or maybe weighted average is a good idea.

See #190 , #234 , and #257 .