This is interesting. Just curious, were you able to narrow down which component was slower? I know that 3.0 includes the full LVG while 2.5 has simple/test LVG by default. But 10x seems pretty extreme...
Sent from my iPhone On Feb 21, 2013, at 1:09 PM, "Kim Ebert" <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi All, > > I am doing a comparison of cTAKES 2.5 and cTAKES 3.0 for a 100 document test > corpus. > > Timing how long it took, I found that cTAKES 2.5 took 1,490.397 seconds while > cTAKES 3.0 took 21,119.485 seconds. It seems like a major slowdown in > performance. > > I used the following analysis engine for cTAKES 3.0: > > desc/ctakes-clinical-pipeline/desc/analysis_engine/AggregatePlaintextUMLSProcessor.xml > > > I used the following analysis engine for cTAKES 2.5: > > cTAKESdesc/cdpdesc/analysis_engine/AggregatePlaintextUMLSProcessor.xml > > Any thoughts on why such a difference in performance? > > Thanks, > > -- > Kim Ebert > 1.801.669.7342 > Perfect Search Corp > http://www.perfectsearchcorp.com/ >
