Great, thanks guys. We have enough volunteers that I'm thinking we can record a few editing sessions. I'm thinking next friday evening PST (16th): http://everytimezone.com/#2013-8-16,900,6be ... and saturday morning: http://everytimezone.com/#2013-8-17,240,6be
No registration will be required. I'll post an email with instructions to this list closer to the date to enter a chat room, and we'll work with who we have online. -J On Fri, Aug 9, 2013 at 2:05 PM, Terry Hardin <thardin...@gmail.com> wrote: > date: ? > time: ? > url: ? > registration required on the platform? > > > On Fri, Aug 9, 2013 at 1:27 PM, John Blossom <jblos...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Would love to help! >> >> All the best, >> >> John Blossom >> >> email: jblos...@gmail.com >> phone: 203.293.8511 >> google+: https://google.com/+JohnBlossom >> >> >> On Thu, Aug 8, 2013 at 4:15 PM, Joseph Gentle <jose...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> > tldr; I need some volunteers to collaboratively edit a document >> > together, so we can systematically evaluate algorithmic performance. >> > >> > >> > So recently Michael linked me to a paper[1] which evaluates a bunch of >> > different concurrency algorithms on speed & memory usage. They got a >> > bunch of students to collaboratively edit two documents and used the >> > operations generated in their benchmarks. >> > >> > The paper has some glaring omissions[2], and the data they gathered >> > isn't publicly available. Of course, I also want to test Torben's >> > algorithm to see how well it performs with realistic usage. >> > >> > So I'd like to reproduce their experiment. To do this I need a few >> > volunteers to collaboratively edit some documents. We should construct >> > realistic editing scenarios. The paper did two things: >> > - Transcribe an episode of big bang theory >> > - Write a report >> > I'm open to suggestions on what we should do - we could also try >> > collaborative creative writing, writing notes on a youtube video, or >> > something. It doesn't really matter so long as the activity is >> > focused, realistic (no keyboard mashing) and involves collaboration. >> > (Sequential editing scenarios aren't interesting) >> > >> > To do this, I'll set up a special instance of ShareJS with ~1s of >> > artificially induced latency and extra logging for the experiment. I >> > want to run this experiment either late next week or on the weekend. >> > >> > The more experimental runs the better - although I suspect most of >> > what we learn will be from the first couple logs. >> > >> > I will publish the raw data from the logs and send out a followup >> > email. The experiment will be anonymous, but don't say anything you >> > wouldn't want publicly known. >> > >> > How does that sound? Who's willing to help out? >> > >> > -J >> > >> > >> > >> > [1] >> > >> http://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/docs/00/62/95/03/PDF/doce63-ahmednacer.pdf >> > [2] Criticisms: >> > - Operations only insert or remove a single character, which means >> > that a copy+paste that one of the users did resulted in 5000 >> > operations, each of which needed to be transformed individually. >> > - Their text editor didn't batch changes - which is really stupid and >> > unrealistic. >> > - The students were all working locally (on a LAN), so there would >> > have been fewer concurrent actions than we should realistically >> > expect. >> > >>
