|
|
|
|
|
by reic
1003 days ago
|
|
Of course (2) is not a perfect measure of accuracy, since it does not quantify how far wrong an output is, e.g. if 111111111111 is the correct output, then both
111111111110 and 829382934783 count as equally faulty. The main advantage of (2) is that it is natural, easy to understand, and easy to measure and compare. We have to start somewhere. I imagine that, in the future, it can be refined (e.g. taking the Hamming distance between desire and actual output). I expect that more refined quantification emerges in response to the community better understanding exactly what is hard in the synthesis of programs. Feel free to submit something! A simple submission is probably just a few lines of code. |
|