You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Similar to the recoded heuristic not producing consistent results, the old implementation has issues when using k-clustering. I used the same data as described in this issue: #21
In addition, I used the following parameters to produce the following results:
-v 3 -r 000000 -c -H -k 4
100: Could not verify the editing costs ... found :817.71 while it should be 819.858
Verifying that solution 0 is a valid solution for WCE ...
Solution validity verified!
200: Could not verify the editing costs ... found :3821.19 while it should be 4160.22
Verifying that solution 0 is a valid solution for WCE ...
Solution validity verified!
300: Could not verify the editing costs ... found :8655.1 while it should be 9262.46
Verifying that solution 0 is a valid solution for WCE ...
Solution validity verified!
400: Could not verify the editing costs ... found :13746 while it should be 13922.8
Verifying that solution 0 is a valid solution for WCE ...
Solution validity verified!
500: Could not verify the editing costs ... found :18772.2 while it should be 23551.6
Verifying that solution 0 is a valid solution for WCE ...
Solution validity verified!
600: Could not verify the editing costs ... found :24973.4 while it should be 30590.8
Verifying that solution 0 is a valid solution for WCE ...
Solution validity verified!
Edit:
If I use the samples without sequencing errors, the issues are even more extreme:
100: Could not verify the editing costs ... found :0 while it should be inf
Verifying that solution 0 is a valid solution for WCE ...
Solution validity verified!
200: Could not verify the editing costs ... found :1347.57 while it should be inf
Verifying that solution 0 is a valid solution for WCE ...
Solution validity verified!
400: Could not verify the editing costs ... found :4796.57 while it should be inf
Verifying that solution 0 is a valid solution for WCE ...
Solution validity verified!
I do not know where the "inf" comes from. It would mean that we put a forbidden edge into a cluster or separated a permanent edge.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Similar to the recoded heuristic not producing consistent results, the old implementation has issues when using k-clustering. I used the same data as described in this issue:
#21
In addition, I used the following parameters to produce the following results:
-v 3 -r 000000 -c -H -k 4
100: Could not verify the editing costs ... found :817.71 while it should be 819.858
Verifying that solution 0 is a valid solution for WCE ...
Solution validity verified!
200: Could not verify the editing costs ... found :3821.19 while it should be 4160.22
Verifying that solution 0 is a valid solution for WCE ...
Solution validity verified!
300: Could not verify the editing costs ... found :8655.1 while it should be 9262.46
Verifying that solution 0 is a valid solution for WCE ...
Solution validity verified!
400: Could not verify the editing costs ... found :13746 while it should be 13922.8
Verifying that solution 0 is a valid solution for WCE ...
Solution validity verified!
500: Could not verify the editing costs ... found :18772.2 while it should be 23551.6
Verifying that solution 0 is a valid solution for WCE ...
Solution validity verified!
600: Could not verify the editing costs ... found :24973.4 while it should be 30590.8
Verifying that solution 0 is a valid solution for WCE ...
Solution validity verified!
Edit:
If I use the samples without sequencing errors, the issues are even more extreme:
100: Could not verify the editing costs ... found :0 while it should be inf
Verifying that solution 0 is a valid solution for WCE ...
Solution validity verified!
200: Could not verify the editing costs ... found :1347.57 while it should be inf
Verifying that solution 0 is a valid solution for WCE ...
Solution validity verified!
400: Could not verify the editing costs ... found :4796.57 while it should be inf
Verifying that solution 0 is a valid solution for WCE ...
Solution validity verified!
I do not know where the "inf" comes from. It would mean that we put a forbidden edge into a cluster or separated a permanent edge.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: