Build up augmentative

G.A.T. Engine general discussion
Post Reply
baalhabait
Advanced
Advanced
Posts: 86
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2012 9:58 pm

Build up augmentative

Post by baalhabait » Mon May 11, 2020 8:21 pm

Hi,
I assume "bulid up" should be recoded and renamed so the process will panorama GAT's that produce the requested category hit and above, for example: 3number hit, 4number hit, 3number hit, or 3number hit, 6number hit, 3number hit, in case such GAT is existed.
In other words, GAT shown in panorama build up, should include augmentative hits according each build up hit category.
Waiting your reply

baalhabait
Advanced
Advanced
Posts: 86
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2012 9:58 pm

Re: Build up augmentative

Post by baalhabait » Sat May 16, 2020 2:30 am

baalhabait wrote:
Mon May 11, 2020 8:21 pm
Hi,
I assume "bulid up" should be recoded and renamed so the process will panorama GAT's that produce the requested category hit and above, for example: 3number hit, 4number hit, 3number hit, or 3number hit, 6number hit, 3number hit, in case such GAT is existed.
In other words, GAT shown in panorama build up, should include augmentative hits according each build up hit category.
Waiting your reply
Well, I wonder why there is no reply in this matter... :? :roll:
Is it because it is such nonsense or no words to say because of some other reason?

User avatar
lottoarchitect
Site Admin
Posts: 1534
Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2008 5:03 pm
Location: Greece
Contact:

Re: Build up augmentative

Post by lottoarchitect » Sat May 16, 2020 1:42 pm

The whole point of build-up is to detect an always increasing hit sequence. The sequence 3,4,6,3 is not an increasing sequence. The current buildup implementation decided on this classification mechanism so to actually be able and somehow sort GATs to display. Of course there will be GATs that result in such sequences like the one you display (and probably quite too many) but there is no easy way to classify them somehow, at least I cannot think of an easy to grasp manner. I recall there was a similar discussion a couple of years ago regarding this.
The short answer is, how to sort the GATs, what GATs go above, what GATs go below, based on what? The total hits criterion (3+4+6+3+...=) is already included in the buildup approach (but for the whole test range) so in effect we have the primary criterion of always showing an increasing hit performance and also among those also to display the ones that overall result in better hits. If you can present an explanation that sorts logically these GATs you look for, I can think of that. I have tried in the past and the decision was it s impossible to actually classify these if the hit performance goes up and down at the end. To understand why this is a problem, the hit sequences are not just the 4 last hits.

baalhabait
Advanced
Advanced
Posts: 86
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2012 9:58 pm

Re: Build up augmentative

Post by baalhabait » Sat May 16, 2020 10:40 pm

lottoarchitect wrote:
Sat May 16, 2020 1:42 pm
If you can present an explanation that sorts logically these GATs you look for, I can think of that.
Why not to use the same logical explanation that is used to highlight GATs in augmentative mode?
The same explanation should be used in build up, or alternatively a completely new panorama mode should be added which will allow showing the GATs that provide augmentative sequences of hits at the end of the GAT table, not necessarily in a "build up" case at the end of the GAT table.
lottoarchitect wrote:
Sat May 16, 2020 1:42 pm
discussion a couple of years ago
BTW, I recall a couple of years ago there was a discussion about implementing synthetic mechanism which will combine GATs results into a completely new result.
Can you tell why this goes down?

User avatar
lottoarchitect
Site Admin
Posts: 1534
Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2008 5:03 pm
Location: Greece
Contact:

Re: Build up augmentative

Post by lottoarchitect » Sun May 17, 2020 2:09 pm

Try to give a detailed example of how you could do that, what you request. Describe the whole approach to the panorama, what you look for, how you classify and sort each GAT in the panorama. If we utilize the augmentative mechanism we don't talk about building up hits production anymore.
Can you tell why this goes down?
Nothing got down. I have explained several times I had quite many bad things happened in my life recently and some I don't want to mention. I don't want to discuss this anymore. All these projects here are not making enough to be considered a full dedicated time job, so I work on them when I have some time and clear mind to do work. Combine all these together, you have the answer. I hope I'll not have to answer such questions in the future and I really wished these programs to be my major means of income so to have full time dedicated to them. Because of these circumstances and customers yelling and complaining here, I decided a couple of years ago I'll never ever announce anything in advance before it is ready; I don't deserve what I got, the nasty behavior towards me. Synthetic was one such "error" of my enthusiasm, only myself knows how much effort I devoted in that synthetic and it was not ready to make it available when I did work "FULL TIME" for many months on the upgrades. I'll not break myself, when it will be ready, it will become available.

baalhabait
Advanced
Advanced
Posts: 86
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2012 9:58 pm

Re: Build up augmentative

Post by baalhabait » Sun May 17, 2020 11:40 pm

Generally, the process should highlight GATs with consecutive sequence of hits at the end of the GAT table in a single column, like with the delay+hits.
The sorting process should place at the top of the panorama the consecutive sequence with the most higher hit(s) regardless of where the higher hit(s) is located within the consecutive hit sequence and regardless of all the results prior of the beginning of the consecutive hit sequence in the GAT table.
In case of the existence of similarity between unknown number of GATs that end with the same consecutive hit sequence, the sorting should be based on ID at least for now.
lottoarchitect wrote:
Sun May 17, 2020 2:09 pm
Because of these circumstances and customers yelling and complaining here
Im sorry dear anastasios, i didn't mean to yell or complain with my inquiries neither force you to break yourself in such a bad timing. :? :roll:
Its just i didn't encounter any explanation about your life, and all i can say about this matter - is that you're not the only one :(

User avatar
lottoarchitect
Site Admin
Posts: 1534
Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2008 5:03 pm
Location: Greece
Contact:

Re: Build up augmentative

Post by lottoarchitect » Mon May 18, 2020 12:32 am

I understand what you say but try to make an actual example to see that this can't be really done and make sense. Consider you have variable-length hit sequences to understand the actual problem here. Which is the sorting criterion? Present an example with 3 different GAT sequences to demonstrate where each GAT should go. Basically I ask to fully present the whole logic (with a complete example) of how this should operate: GATs to consider, how to deal with variable-length hit sequences and how to define those length-sequences, sorting among different variable-length hit sequences and sorting among equal-length hit sequences. These are the main problems to address and I can't think of a proper way this can be done and the reason I decided on the current buildup mechanism. To understand these issues, try to present an example to see them.

baalhabait
Advanced
Advanced
Posts: 86
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2012 9:58 pm

Re: Build up augmentative

Post by baalhabait » Mon May 18, 2020 5:58 am

No doubt this is not an easy task to deal with, however discarding all off these GATs is not much of an actual solution to the problem.
I will attempt to provide some demonstration for this complicated issue, I hope you'll not get confused too much...
Lets say we have these hit sequences:
4,5,4,4
3,6,4,3,3,4
3,4,3,3
3,4,4,3,4,5,3
5,3,3,5,3,6
4,3,6,3,6
I suppose the first stage of the sorting would be among different lengths of hit sequences, which means the longer the length of the hit sequence the higher it should be placed at the panorama regardless the value of each one of the hits.
Sorting among equal length hit sequences could be based on the total quality of the whole hit sequence...
Panorama should show the above hit sequences in this order:
3,4,4,3,4,5,3
5,3,3,5,3,6
3,6,4,3,3,4
4,3,6,3,6
4,5,4,4
3,4,3,3
Final and determining stage of sorting, should override the earlier stages of sorting and place the GAT with the most qualitative hit sequence at the topmost of the panorama, regardless of the hit sequence length, which means:
4,3,6,3,6
5,3,3,5,3,6
3,6,4,3,3,4
3,4,4,3,4,5,3
4,5,4,4
3,4,3,3
As a matter of fact, sorting could be directly based on the most qualitative hit sequence, regardless the sequences lengths.

User avatar
lottoarchitect
Site Admin
Posts: 1534
Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2008 5:03 pm
Location: Greece
Contact:

Re: Build up augmentative

Post by lottoarchitect » Mon May 18, 2020 11:05 am

Give me your definition of your hit sequence. The only reason buildup ended as it is, is because we can have a proper hit sequence definition. All the examples you demonstrate above have an issue, we cannot really have a definition to obtain these given they contain lower hits inside them.

To understand where the problem lie consider this:
why is this a 4,3,6,3,6,6 sequence when it does have a 4 at the start and then follows a lower hit next and not this 3,6,3,6,6 (omit the initial 4)? Similarly, even why to consider this 3,6,3,6,6 and not this 3,6,6 (omit the initial 3,6 part)? The obvious pick as a normal hit sequence is only this last 3,6,6 one. If somehow you accept as hit sequence this 4,3,6,3,6,6, then it is obligatory to finally pick as hit sequence the whole hit range, pretty pointless. Why even pick this 4,3,6,3,6,6 as sequence and not a 2,3,4,5,1,0,3,4,3,6,3,6,6 sequence? Where does the picking end? Which is the criterion?

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest