Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2014 05:22:47 -0800 (PST)
From: Riley Martinez-Lynch <shunpiker@gmail.com>
To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Message-Id: <6bbd98f3-568c-4afb-ae5b-1172c97b0fbd@googlegroups.com>
In-Reply-To: <53191F77.1090002@lojban.org>
References: <Z4y71n00V56Cr6M014y8Sr>
 <53191F77.1090002@lojban.org>
Subject: Re: [lojban] Historical "finprims" gismu algorithm weights and scores
MIME-Version: 1.0
Reply-To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Precedence: list
Mailing-list: list lojban@googlegroups.com; contact lojban+owners@googlegroups.com
Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; 
	boundary="----=_Part_214_16003878.1394198567912"
X-Spam_score: -0.1
X-Spam_score_int: 0
X-Spam_bar: /

------=_Part_214_16003878.1394198567912
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

Thank you for the comprehensive reply!

>  1. Is the finprims document representative of the gismu-making process 
> >     described in CLL and/or the "1987 gismu-remaking" process? Or were 
> >     these separate efforts? 
>
> yes, "and", not separate, though a few words were added later than 1987 
> using later weights 
>

Does finprims include these later gismu?

I'm making a guess based on 25 year old memories, but I think we were 
> using integer arithmetic because it ran too slow otherwise (my brother 
> in law eventually recoded the inside loop in assembler, which sped 
> things up by an order of magnitude, but it was still incredibly slow by 
> today's standards, 5-100 minutes per source-word trial.) 
>

Great detail. Do you happen to remember what kind of computer/CPU you used?

The actual weights from the final version of the program were 
>       Weight[1]  := 67; { Chinese   } 
>       Weight[2]  := 36; { English   } 
>       Weight[3]  := 33; { Spanish   } 
>       Weight[4]  := 25; { Hindi     } 
>       Weight[5]  := 24; { Russian   } 
>       Weight[6]  := 15; { Arabic    } 


The use of integer arithmetic and halving before summing is one possible 
way these weights could have yielded 98.

Update: I have two "final" versions of the program, in source and 
> executable, but cannot recall what the difference is.  The first was 
> almost certainly used for all the 1987 prim runs, while we may have used 
> the second one for the words added later. 


> I also think I have the full set of outputs of the data runs, which 
> gives the numbers that eventually went into finprims.  (There were a 
> couple of intermediate steps - finprims was generated by me manually 
> after all the word runs were made, and I had picked the "winners".) 


If you are willing to wade into the old Turbo-Pascal code, I may be able 
> to find it and send it to you.


If you have a chance to send the pascal code, and/or the outputs, I would 
be very interested to see them. Is your brother-in-law's assembly code 
archived with all of this?

mi'e la mukti mu'o

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

------=_Part_214_16003878.1394198567912
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr">Thank you for the comprehensive reply!<div><br></div><div>=
<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin: 0;margin-left: 0.8ex;bor=
der-left: 1px #ccc solid;padding-left: 1ex;">&gt; &nbsp;1. Is the finprims =
document representative of the gismu-making process
<br>&gt; &nbsp; &nbsp; described in CLL and/or the "1987 gismu-remaking" pr=
ocess? Or were
<br>&gt; &nbsp; &nbsp; these separate efforts?
<br>
<br>yes, "and", not separate, though a few words were added later than 1987=
=20
<br>using later weights
<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Does finprims include these later gism=
u?</div><div><br></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin: 0=
;margin-left: 0.8ex;border-left: 1px #ccc solid;padding-left: 1ex;">I'm mak=
ing a guess based on 25 year old memories, but I think we were=20
<br>using integer arithmetic because it ran too slow otherwise (my brother=
=20
<br>in law eventually recoded the inside loop in assembler, which sped=20
<br>things up by an order of magnitude, but it was still incredibly slow by=
=20
<br>today's standards, 5-100 minutes per source-word trial.)
<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Great detail. Do you happen to remembe=
r what kind of computer/CPU you used?</div></div><div><br></div><blockquote=
 class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; border-left-widt=
h: 1px; border-left-color: rgb(204, 204, 204); border-left-style: solid; pa=
dding-left: 1ex;">The actual weights from the&nbsp;final version of the pro=
gram were&nbsp;<br>&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; Weight[1] &nbsp;:=3D 67; { Chinese =
&nbsp; }&nbsp;<br>&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; Weight[2] &nbsp;:=3D 36; { English &=
nbsp; }&nbsp;<br>&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; Weight[3] &nbsp;:=3D 33; { Spanish &n=
bsp; }&nbsp;<br>&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; Weight[4] &nbsp;:=3D 25; { Hindi &nbsp=
; &nbsp; }&nbsp;<br>&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; Weight[5] &nbsp;:=3D 24; { Russian=
 &nbsp; }&nbsp;<br>&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; Weight[6] &nbsp;:=3D 15; { Arabic &=
nbsp; &nbsp;}&nbsp;</blockquote><div><br></div><div>The use of integer arit=
hmetic and halving before summing is one possible way these weights could h=
ave yielded 98.</div><div><br></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=
=3D"margin: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; border-left-width: 1px; border-left-color: r=
gb(204, 204, 204); border-left-style: solid; padding-left: 1ex;">Update: I =
have two "final" versions of the program, in source and&nbsp;<br>executable=
, but cannot recall what the difference is. &nbsp;The first was&nbsp;<br>al=
most certainly used for all the 1987 prim runs, while we may have used&nbsp=
;<br>the second one for the words added later.&nbsp;</blockquote><blockquot=
e class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; border-left-wid=
th: 1px; border-left-color: rgb(204, 204, 204); border-left-style: solid; p=
adding-left: 1ex;"><br>I also think I have the full set of outputs of the d=
ata runs, which&nbsp;<br>gives the numbers that eventually went into finpri=
ms. &nbsp;(There were a&nbsp;<br>couple of intermediate steps - finprims wa=
s generated by me manually&nbsp;<br>after all the word runs were made, and =
I had picked the "winners".)&nbsp;</blockquote><div><br></div><div><blockqu=
ote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; border-left-w=
idth: 1px; border-left-color: rgb(204, 204, 204); border-left-style: solid;=
 padding-left: 1ex;">If you are willing to wade into the old Turbo-Pascal c=
ode, I may be able&nbsp;<br>to find it and send it to you.</blockquote><div=
><br></div><div>If you have a chance to send the pascal code, and/or the ou=
tputs, I would be very interested to see them. Is your brother-in-law's ass=
embly code archived with all of this?</div></div><div><br></div><div>mi'e l=
a mukti mu'o</div></div>

<p></p>

-- <br />
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &=
quot;lojban&quot; group.<br />
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e=
mail to <a href=3D"mailto:lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com">lojban+unsub=
scribe@googlegroups.com</a>.<br />
To post to this group, send email to <a href=3D"mailto:lojban@googlegroups.=
com">lojban@googlegroups.com</a>.<br />
Visit this group at <a href=3D"http://groups.google.com/group/lojban">http:=
//groups.google.com/group/lojban</a>.<br />
For more options, visit <a href=3D"https://groups.google.com/d/optout">http=
s://groups.google.com/d/optout</a>.<br />

------=_Part_214_16003878.1394198567912--