>On June 30, 2003 06:49 am, Ben Hawes wrote: >>�>>�P_best_dnf()*dnf_time(node,key)*htl+(P_dnf(node)-P_best_dnf())* >>�>>��(dnf_time(node,key)*htl + global_success_estimate(key)) >>�> >>�>If I factor correctly this works out to: >>�> >>�>P_dnf(node)*dnf_time(node,key)*htl+ >>�>(P_dnf(node)-P_best_dnf())*global_success_estimate(key) >> >>�Abbreviations to make things easier: >>�P_best_dnf() = b >>�dnf_time(node,key) = t >>�htl = h >>�P_dnf(node) = p >>�global_success_estimate(key) = s >> >>�This makes the first equation >> >>�bth+(p-b)th+s > >Almost > >�bth + (p-b)(th+s) >> >>�Factorising 'th' out gives >> >>�(b+p-b)th + s >> > >bth + pth + ps - bth - bs > >or > >pth + ps - bs > >or > >pth + (p-b)s > >Which is what I am using
DOH! yup :P >>�I hope did that all ok... :P > >You missed a bracket.. Figures...the one time I figure "Hey, I know this one..." and post, I screw up :D But yeah, just reading it through, it makes a lot more sense that way round... >After 10 hours I am seeing about a 17% message success rate with this. >This is a good number, I would like to see more activity though. > >Ed [ cruise / casual-tempest.net / transference.org ] _______________________________________________ devl mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hawk.freenetproject.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
