anastasios-tampakis.net

The automatic mode does everything by itself. During the process it proposes the best numbers it could come up with directly, there are no GAT tables or any panorama to inspect. This mode underneath utilizes various techniques and decide among them automatically to pick the one approach that thinks ...

At this point such discussions are pointless, is it 0.325% better or -1.2% worse or 4.2% better here and 3% worse there or whatever? Can we please stop this never ending discussion? If I had something precise to show to you I would, I don't have any reason not to. I believe you have understood by no...

It means it may return a worse result by up to 2% (-2%) or better outcome by up to 5% (+5%). It is just a range to show where the improvement or deterioration fall. So ti can be e.g. 2% worse outcome or 5% better outcome on any particular aspect we look at. This is just an example, what I said overa...

Ok, I have to admit this is a nice video, love the music! One step is missing, after the Run Factor you have to show we pick the initial GAT and its new proposed numbers. This video briefly demonstrates the basic/standard/original GAT usage.

Everyone is entitled to his opinion. At the given moment, all I can say is this : it is better overall, slightly mostly whatever this may represent i.e. fewer 0-hits, some more 4 hits production more 5 hits, making the good hits appear closer to the top to pick from and more such categories; pick an...

I'm bummed out since the export to Excel doesn't work on my computer. Nothing I could think of to try worked. Is there a chance of this being looked at and improved specifically in the future? Already implemented the same information as export to text file for those situations the excel does not wo...

I feel you get frustrated. Calm down please. If I could give something more precise, i would. How better is the GAT’s performance? This can't be answered with any number. If 2.3 could present to you eg 10 good results, you'll get > 10 with the new version and not everywhere or anytime. Still this is...

With the current design the speed is as you describe it. If a scan needed 10 hours for 2.3, it now needs around 5 or so. But don't count on this as nothing is fully finalized yet. It will be surely faster than 2.3 anyway You ask for figures on performance, this question can't be answered by any numb...

About those other "advanced" strategies, do you think they are viable? Most seem like voodoo and one-offs to me. All approaches are aftermath over the original information which is the outcome of a single GAT Table. For example, mixing GATs to pick the most occurring numbers has merit only if most ...

How about GAT 3.0's scanning speed? If faster, how many hours does it need under the same conditions above? The raw speed has been increased to more than 2x compared to 2.3 version at this point. However till the whole thing is finalized, something more can be added or altered that may result in fu...