> I'm sorry I didn't put axes on the graph... I think you have been misreading > it, as you are characterizing the fluctuations as "noise."
You are correct, I assumed that the X axis represented document size, so my interpretation of your graph was totally incorrect. > Let me clarify: The vertical axis is actual or predicted latency. > The horizontal is just "sample index". Why are the first few BDA1 predictions along the X axis all the same in the first graph? > To clarify this misunderstanding further, I've introduced another graph > on the webpage showing file size vs. latency in inp.dat. That certainly makes more sense. > > I really feel that the only fair comparison will be with a large > > realistic dataset, and being compared against the actual algorithm we > > have developed for this purpose, for which even BDA3 is a primitive > > substitute. I will try to extract such a dataset from Hui so that we > > can make some progress here. > Ok this will be the best test. Agreed - I suggest we suspend our debate of this sample data until we have the results of a test with SVM and RTE using actual collected data. If I don't hear back from Hui soon I will see if I can collect some more sample data which I can use. Ian. -- Ian Clarke [EMAIL PROTECTED] Coordinator, The Freenet Project http://freenetproject.org/ Founder, Locutus http://locut.us/ Personal Homepage http://locut.us/ian/
pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature
