Skip to content

"ratio of averages" weights SLE’17 "Table 4. Normalized global results" #37

@igouy

Description

@igouy
  1. I've managed to calculate the exact same "Time" values as those shown in SLE’17 Table 4 : starting from these results tables —

    https://sites.google.com/view/energy-efficiency-languages/results

  2. So now I understand those normalized Time values show the arithmetic mean of the times for each language —

(language1 time1 + language1 time2 + language1 time3 + language1 timeN) / N

— divided by the arithmetic mean of the times for C language.

In other words, "the ratio of averages" for each language to the average for C.

  1. As-far-as-I-can-tell that calculation seems to "weight" each program measurement differently.

For example, because the fannkuch-redux programs are run for ~20x more time than the reverse-complement programs; the un-normalized time fannkuch-redux contributes to the average have more weight than the time reverse-complement contributes to the average.

That may be what was intended.

  1. On the other hand, the intention may have been that each program - binary-trees, fannkuch-redux, fasta, reverse-complement - contributed the same weight to the Table 4 average.

If each program was intended to contribute the same weight to the Table 4 average, then Table 4 should show "the average of ratios" ?

https://jlmc.medium.com/understanding-three-simple-statistics-for-data-visualizations-2619dbb3677a

https://dl.acm.org/doi/pdf/10.1145/5666.5673

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Labels

    No labels
    No labels

    Type

    No type

    Projects

    No projects

    Milestone

    No milestone

    Relationships

    None yet

    Development

    No branches or pull requests

    Issue actions