On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 11:22:42PM +0200, Victor Stinner wrote: > 2016-06-10 20:47 GMT+02:00 Meador Inge <mead...@gmail.com>: > > Apologies in advance if this is answered in one of the links you posted, but > > out of curiosity was geometric mean considered? > > > > In the compiler world this is a very common way of aggregating performance > > results. > > FYI I chose to store all timings in the JSON file. So later, you are > free to recompute the average differently, compute other statistics, > etc. > > I saw that the CPython benchmark suite has an *option* to compute the > geometric mean. I don't understand well the difference with the > arithmeric mean. > > Is the geometric mean recommended to aggregate results of different > (unrelated) benchmarks, or also even for multuple runs of a single > benchmark?
The Wikipedia article discusses this, but sits on the fence and can't decide whether using the gmean for performance results is a good or bad idea: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geometric_mean#Properties Geometric mean is usually used in finance for averaging rates of growth: https://www.math.toronto.edu/mathnet/questionCorner/geomean.html If you express your performances as speeds (as "calculations per second") then the harmonic mean is the right way to average them. -- Steve _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
