Reminds me of http://xkcd.com/552/

W dniu 10.08.2012 16:37, Lane Schwartz pisze:
> Well, it may be mostly bogus, but it's not *totally* bogus. :)
>
> I use this number when I perform more advanced corpus splitting (see
> my upcoming MT Marathon paper!), and while I can't claim to know that
> it's accurate, it does at least seem to be well-proportioned. That is,
> very short sentences that are processed very quickly report a small
> number here, and very long sentences that are processed very slowly
> report a large number here.
>
> On Fri, Aug 10, 2012 at 10:29 AM, Marcin Junczys-Dowmunt
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> I on the other hand always had the impression that the time reported
>> there is a total bogus, especially for multi-threaded decoding.
>>
>> W dniu 10.08.2012 16:26, Lane Schwartz pisze:
>>> Not sure what it's supposed to be, but I like having some result that
>>> reports the total per-sentence processing time, including both
>>> collecting options and search.
>>>
>>> I'd just always assumed that the search time reported was that number,
>>> I figured that to get just the search time you could subtract the
>>> Collecting Options time.
>>>
>>> On Fri, Aug 10, 2012 at 10:13 AM, Jonathan Clark <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> Hi all,
>>>>
>>>> I just noticed that the moses time reporting is rather misleading.
>>>>
>>>> We see lines:
>>>> Collecting options took 13.390 seconds
>>>> Search took 13.390 seconds
>>>> Translation took 13.390 seconds
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> However, the "Search took X seconds" count also includes collecting 
>>>> options,
>>>> which seems wrong. I have a patch for this I can push, but I just want to
>>>> make sure I'm not missing something. This is broken, right?
>>>>
>>>> Jon
>

_______________________________________________
Moses-support mailing list
[email protected]
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/moses-support

Reply via email to