Cleaner HON Build code with faster computation#11
Open
fqueyroi wants to merge 1 commit intoxyjprc:masterfrom
fqueyroi:patch-1
Open
Cleaner HON Build code with faster computation#11fqueyroi wants to merge 1 commit intoxyjprc:masterfrom fqueyroi:patch-1
fqueyroi wants to merge 1 commit intoxyjprc:masterfrom
fqueyroi:patch-1
Conversation
Hi all! After doing some tests, I seems to me that there is a cleaner way of defining the HON network (or rather the Edge set) from a set of Rules. Let S=s1s2s3... be a rule and t a symbol in the input sequence such that Rules[S][t] > 0, this will correspond in HON to a directed edge S -> S*t where S*t is the concatenation of list S* and list with a single element t here S*=s3s4... is the longest suffix of S such that S*t is an existing rule. For example if S=abc and Rules[abc][t] > 0 then there will be an edge abc -> bct if 'abct' was not detected as a rule while 'bct' was. If not extension of 't' was detected as rule, we would simply have abc -> t (since the longest suffix S* is here the empty string). From this definition we can rewrite the code of "BuildNetwork.py" without using any rewiring of edges. Using real datasets I got the same HON with the proposed changes. Moreover my methods seems to be way faster when there are a lot of edges to add (or rewire in the current version). I hope I didn't miss something. I tested both approaches on different real world sequences and the new definition of the edge set is comprehensive IMO but still ...
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Hi all!
After doing some tests, I seems to me that there is a cleaner way of defining the HON network (or rather the Edge set) from a set of Rules.
Let S=s1s2s3... be a rule and t a symbol in the input sequence such that Rules[S][t] > 0,
this will correspond in HON to a directed edge S -> S't where S't is the concatenation of S' and t
here S'=s3s4... is the longest suffix of S such that S't is an existing rule.
For example if S=abc and Rules[abc][t] > 0 then there will be an edge abc -> bct if 'abct' was not detected as a rule while 'bct' was.
If no extension of 't' was detected as a rule, we would simply have abc -> t (since the longest suffix S' is here the empty string).
From this definition we can rewrite the code of "BuildNetwork.py" without using any rewiring of edges. Using real datasets I got the same HON with the proposed changes. Moreover my method seems to be faster when there are a lot of edges to add (or rewiring to do in the current version).
I hope I didn't miss something. I tested both approaches on different real world sequences and the new definition of the edge set is comprehensive IMO but still ...