Hello all,
I am looking for articles or benchmarks measuring, during Machine Learning pipelines, the amount of data and computing power needed on its different steps. I suppose, for example on object recognition tasks, there is a lot of data in the beginning which goes through fast cleaning and simplification of the perceived stream (considering this a data task with low cpu involved (my speculation)), then is sent to an intensive classification/convolution part that is cpu-intensive.
I want to know if these pipelines can be decomposed to be executed on heterogeneous environments (say sensor => raspi (data reduction) => cloud (cpu calculation)), etc.
I see some metrics like mAP, FLOPS, etc. but it doesnt seem simple to see where is the space and the time used.
If someone can give me some tips or stuff to read. Thank you a lot !
Hey guys,
I am studying the Pyrit wireless cracking tool, I know that it can pre compute pmks from a given wordlist and access point , it's mentioned that this id done in a space time trade off, but what is meant by space time trade off in this situation?
I'm assuming you use more space for less time judging by the name, but what space do you use? space in main memory? space on the hdd/ssd?
thanks
Some background before I get into my question. I'm currently writing a program that finds optimal solutions to the Rubik's cube. My first step towards doing this involves creating a database that stores the minimum path lengths to solve of all possible configurations of corner pieces. I'm currently looking into methods on how to go about doing this.
The paper I read says that they used BFS from the solved state to account for all 88,179,840 possible combinations. However, the number of moves to solve corners from any given state does not exceed 11, and the generated search tree has a branching factor of 18. 18^11 is about 64 trillion. Of course, I can't fit this many nodes in memory, so I will not expand nodes that represent combinations that have already been seen. Since there are only 88,179,840 possible combinations, I should be able to fit all of this in memory.
Now, here is the issue I'm trying to understand. In any given corner piece position, there are 3 faces x 8 pieces = 24 different ways to put a corner piece there. This means that I only need 5 bits to store the value of any given corner position. With 8 corner positions, that results in 40 bits, or 5 bytes. I could instead store these values in chars, and this would take up 8 bytes.
The previous method seems like it would save more space per node. I'm not sure if this is the case, because I think that the structs might be word aligned, so there would be 3 unused bytes between generated nodes. If it does save space, I'm concerned about how much extra time would be used during computation. It seems like there would need to be an extra assembly statement to transform the value stored in a bit field into something usable, which would take more time. Does anyone here have any thoughts on this?
I'd like to premise this by saying that this ought to be a frank discussion about our hopes for the finished game but it's bound to have some controversy. All opinions are welcome.
I've often gotten the notion from a lot of the more heated issues relating to SC, like the controller balance arguments, flight model discussions and the issues related to the FPS (head-bob and player movement) that what is really being addressed is that there are two factions with two different expectations about what SC is meant to be. One group of citizens is anticipating a complex and challenging flight-sim esque game with a steep learning curve that demands a good understanding of your ship's flight model and subsystems. The other is anticipating a user-friendly and intuitive space-sim type game with the same subsystems and IFCS working under the hood but the control scheme and gameplay being easy enough to pick up and play.
It's clear at this stage with Zane's work on UI design that CIG is planning on splitting the difference and allowing players to tweak the IFCS and fiddle with the subsystems when they decide to but keeping the controls and UI intuitive enough for a player who is just starting out.
But of course, this sounds like a tall order to get right for CIG. Are they going to be able to keep ships effective with the default settings for new players? Is there going to be sufficient reason to dig into the guts of a ship's IFCS in order to tweak and improve it's efficacy and control? What subsystem tweaks are genuinely useful and what amounts to a needless addition to the gameplay that does little more than satiate the flight-sim crowd by saying the controls are there but the controls themselves being of little value?
How do you see the subsystem controls playing out? What are your hopes for these features? Will you use them? Personally, I want all of the complexity they can throw at me. But like my concerns about Mkbd/IM control, I worry that CIG will put the emphasis on keeping the base controls and settings for the sake of new players ahead of those who want a complex and fully featured flight-sim experience.
Hey all, I've done some searching online and it sounds like most sane designers say "no" to pixel perfect designs, which makes sense. However, there are always going to be certain clients who want that, or as close as possible to that.
I wanted to get your input on what you think the time tradeoffs are like for your regular workflow vs a near-pixel-perfect workflow? I'm doing this type of work for a current client and it's a lot of "measure PSD, measure browser render, adjust, get client feedback". It seems like getting things to match a PSD as exactly as possible (given what a browser can do) is taking me 2X or 3X the time. I'm primarily a developer and not a designer, so that factors into it - for example, sometimes a font weight will be off - to my eye it looks good but the client notices these small differences, and this definitely slows me down. I realize now that I need to be explicit with clients upfront and factor in more time when they are looking to match exactly to a PSD (I'm not sure yet on the exact wording I'll use to present that tradeoff to clients).
tl;dr How much more effort (longer) does it take you to match exactly to a PSD vs working "by eye".
Looking forward to hearing your opinions.
I thought this would be creepy with jump scares but I had no idea, no grasp of how scary the 1st Dead space is. But tbh this is my first time playing any dead space game. I love it but damn good job🤌👏 beautiful piece of scary, sick art.
Did they plan weekly resupply schedules? Or maybe even cryostasis, considering their tech level?
I'm also thinking the 2007 Sunshine movie.
So, for some reason unknown to me, the Barathrumites started attacking each other when I returned to Grit Gate. At the end of their melee, I got a message saying, "Otho dematerializes out of the local region of spacetime." I'm thinking this means he jumped through a space time portal. Any sense of when/if he'll return? I've got the stamped data disk, but don't want to bother with Bethesda Susa if the quest isn't going to be finishable. Got a nice 18-level mutie going, and would rather not abandon my game!
Hope this makes sense. My psych told me to take the Wellbutrin in the morning and not to take the Prozac at the same time but she didn’t specify when I should take it. I took the Wellbutrin at like 12 today (later than I wanted to) but I normally take Prozac around one. However I’m not sure when to take it now. Should I take it at night? When do you usually take it?
