Search found 485 matches

by cmloegcmluin
Sat Oct 31, 2020 12:28 pm
Forum: Just Intonation notations
Topic: developing a notational comma popularity metric
Replies: 469
Views: 26296

Re: developing a notational comma popularity metric

Excellent work! Thank you. With that list, we've definitely got possible tina commas covered. \m/ \m/ But shouldn't the column with the symbols in it be titled "notating symbol classes", or at least have the word "symbol" in its title somewhere? Yeah... nice catch. I think some things got a little ...
by cmloegcmluin
Sat Oct 31, 2020 11:08 am
Forum: Just Intonation notations
Topic: developing a notational comma popularity metric
Replies: 469
Views: 26296

Re: developing a notational comma popularity metric

Don't be mad... I spent my Friday knocking out some loose ends. I just get distracted when stuff gets frayed and I can't focus on the main thread. But great news! Awesome. That's such a manageable number that I suggest you forget about my complicated denominator-generating procedure that this result...
by cmloegcmluin
Fri Oct 30, 2020 2:48 am
Forum: Just Intonation notations
Topic: developing a notational comma popularity metric
Replies: 469
Views: 26296

Re: developing a notational comma popularity metric

Perhaps only eliminate those whose usefulness error (according to the above lpe function) is very large. Say greater than 1. ...I could try that. This could just be part of the squared error calculation for each existing comma (return zero if the error is greater than some threshold). Good thinking...
by cmloegcmluin
Thu Oct 29, 2020 11:12 am
Forum: Just Intonation notations
Topic: developing a notational comma popularity metric
Replies: 469
Views: 26296

Re: developing a notational comma popularity metric

Right[, that's the `lpe` metric]. And if we replace those two commas that have N2D3P9 > 1000, then it matches 93 of the 123. :thumbsup: maybe we should go back over that list and see if all those commas are the most useful in their zones, therefore justifying their subpar popularity. At some stage,...
by cmloegcmluin
Thu Oct 29, 2020 4:43 am
Forum: Just Intonation notations
Topic: developing a notational comma popularity metric
Replies: 469
Views: 26296

Re: developing a notational comma popularity metric

So far, the best such usefulness-ranking function I have found (based on maximising the number of existing commas that it ranks as the most useful in their zone), is: usefulness_rank = lb(N2D3P9) + 1/12 × AAS 1.37 + 2^(ATE-10.5) Just so we've got this straight, that's the `\text{lpe}` metric (short...
by cmloegcmluin
Mon Oct 26, 2020 12:59 pm
Forum: Just Intonation notations
Topic: developing a notational comma popularity metric
Replies: 469
Views: 26296

Re: developing a notational comma popularity metric

Thanks for correcting me. TBH, I hadn't taken the time to carefully understand your suggestion yet. I should have just admitted that. I'm focusing on the refactor I'm in the middle of, so that I can finish in time for pairing on the more important comma usefulness work with you tomorrow.
by cmloegcmluin
Mon Oct 26, 2020 11:24 am
Forum: Just Intonation notations
Topic: developing a notational comma popularity metric
Replies: 469
Views: 26296

Re: developing a notational comma popularity metric

Thanks for this. I will plug in the benefits of these sorted lists soon, following your suggestions.
by cmloegcmluin
Mon Oct 26, 2020 3:58 am
Forum: Just Intonation notations
Topic: developing a notational comma popularity metric
Replies: 469
Views: 26296

Re: developing a notational comma popularity metric

Dave Keenan wrote:
Sun Oct 25, 2020 12:49 pm
My guess is that there won't be any more, because if there were, they would have to include 5772 = 3 828 125, but its N2D3P9 is 5815.29.
Indeed there were no further results (besides, of course, 9765625 itself).
by cmloegcmluin
Sun Oct 25, 2020 3:01 pm
Forum: Just Intonation notations
Topic: developing a notational comma popularity metric
Replies: 469
Views: 26296

Re: developing a notational comma popularity metric

Dave Keenan wrote:
Sun Oct 25, 2020 12:49 pm
As I pointed out earlier, you only need to consider prime factors up to 307. Anything with a greater prime factor must have N2D3P9 > 5298.2 because 311/2 * 311/9 = 5373.4.
So you did. Ah, if we could only pair program sometimes!