History Performance in original order too

[receptor]

Hi Anastasios,

Please add G.A.T. in original order to History Performance (too)!

Thank You & Merry Christmas & Happy New Year!

J.T. - Hungary

[lottoarchitect]

That is under consideration for inclusion.

[receptor]

Maybe the G.A.T. numbers and what settings did the service find for them?

[lottoarchitect]

The online system operates in a different manner to GAT. It uses the same building blocks (the GAT tables) and attempts to combine various results from them. This approach is what I suggested to end up in GAT as the automatic mode. So, no it will not work suggesting settings used by the online system to make the exact same runs as the process involved is different.

[receptor]

And the logic of the process is public?

[lottoarchitect]

What do you mean public?

[receptor]

It uses the same building blocks (the GAT tables) and attempts to combine various results from them.

I thought about that in more detail...

[lottoarchitect]

At its current implementation it scans augmentative tables just like what GAT 3.0 delivers with the inclusion of internally used Hits+Delay information. As it goes through each produced GAT table, it picks it as the current candidate if that table results in more total hits production + Hits/delay score compared to its previous pick. The GATs it scans are the same that end up in current GAT 3.0 augmentative panorama when you request X picked numbers, with the exception it does not sort them in columns as per the hit category. So, in reality the online service typically picks among the GATs at the top row and stop the scan if no new GATs make it there in a given time. One distinction here is the stat.data/tested draws setting used for the online service has been manually determined over lengthy runs. The benefit of GAT 3.0 is it has an automatic stat.data evaluator, something that will be added at the online system at some point. So, currently GAT can deliver better outcome compared to the online simply because of a better stat.data selection it can make.

Given this is a work in progress which is aimed to eventually end up in GAT as a complete automatic analysis, I have attempted various approaches, some involve averaging picked numbers among GATs, mixing scans of various stat.data, mixing results of various "request X numbers" etc. When I conclude what will be the most preferred approach, it will end up in GAT and the exact same methodology will operate for the online service too. No matter what, the building blocks and primary information are the GAT tables themselves.

[receptor]

Thank You for your detailed and interesting reply!

[receptor]

So it's better to use the program instead of online service
with default settings (100 Draws, Eval Data, 100 scan limit, 0 R.F.)
and use GAT Tables from Delay + Hits?