Guru V1.8- sep,oct,nov,dec,jan??Prev TopicNext Topic

• paul762

  

  United Kingdom
  Member #3,002
  December 11, 2003
  542 Posts
  Offline
  Sep 10, 2004, 4:36 pm

  ▲▼

  guru, you havent mentioned the speed issue, will 1.8 be faster than the rest? if so by how much?
• reddog

  

  Durham, North Carolina
  United States
  Member #1,616
  June 5, 2003
  4,752 Posts
  Offline
  Sep 10, 2004, 6:18 pm

  ▲▼

  Quote: Originally posted by Raziel on September 10, 2004
  

  ---

  
  
  

   

  I'm glad your still plugging away on it and quite happy it will be available before Christmas.

  When !.8 is released I'm buying

  Raziel

  
  

  ---

  
  

  
  

  where did you get the idea that it was going to be avaliable before Christmas? I haven't heard  a straight answer about anything yet.

  No time frame, no updates, nothing.
  

  Taking it one day at a time, because there's no way to know what might have been.
• Guru

  Belgium
  Member #2,220
  September 2, 2003
  553 Posts
  Offline
  Sep 11, 2004, 2:42 am

  ▲▼

  Paul:

  Haven't made an exact speed comparison with v1,6 and 1,7, but it's going to be significantly faster.

  Plus. It will already have a result after something like half an hour. After that it continues doing refinement cycles on the prediction. So basicly you can let it run untill you need the numbers. After that first half hour it will always be ready with the best result it could find. The longer you let it run however, the better.

  I've chosen for this method because it offers more flexibility than setting a quality (samples) in advance and not being sure it finishes in time. This technique posed a serious problem with big predictions for keno for example (too difficult to figure out exactly how long it would run). Now it's just entirely your decision when you will stop it.

  Reddog:

  I'm not going to set a release date because I don't want to be restricted by it. I want to take the time needed to make it as it should be. But before Christmas should be no problem at all.
• paul762

  

  United Kingdom
  Member #3,002
  December 11, 2003
  542 Posts
  Offline
  Sep 11, 2004, 5:25 am

  ▲▼

  guru, I dont understand, why would I want to let it run longer if after 30 mins. it already has the best results it can find? this sounds like there will be accuracy problems again, just like when we had to choose the sample rating, but now its how long you leave it running. looks like i'm going to be stuck with the second(losing) group again and i'll probably end up with the same results as with 1.6 
• Raziel

  

  Fergus
  Canada
  Member #5,532
  July 9, 2004
  87 Posts
  Offline
  Sep 11, 2004, 10:51 am

  ▲▼

   

  Will 1.8 will still support KENO Guru

  Raziel
• Guru

  Belgium
  Member #2,220
  September 2, 2003
  553 Posts
  Offline
  Sep 11, 2004, 11:17 am

  ▲▼

  Paul:

  nonononono After 30 mins there is a first result, but the longer you let it run the better. Let's say for a pick6 prediction running on a 2 gigherz computer 3 to 6 hours is more than enough.

  The first results of lottosync. is like the first results of the elections when not all votes are counted yet. They give a good indication of what the final results will be, but things may still shift a bit.

  Raziel:

  Keno will be supported
• spock

  

  N.ireland
  United Kingdom
  Member #2,962
  December 6, 2003
  69 Posts
  Offline
  Sep 11, 2004, 12:00 pm

  ▲▼

  I can see Guru now with that white beard red coat and 1.8. in the sack...
• vick

  

  Canada
  Member #2,859
  November 23, 2003
  463 Posts
  Offline
  Sep 11, 2004, 9:30 pm

  ▲▼

  Quote: O
• paul762

  

  United Kingdom
  Member #3,002
  December 11, 2003
  542 Posts
  Offline
  Sep 12, 2004, 9:27 am

  ▲▼

  guru, you mentioned previously about the accuracy of 3 numbers from 9 every 3 draws, but i'd like to know if this accuracy is based on the 30 min. prediction or the 6 hour+ prediction.
• Guru

  Belgium
  Member #2,220
  September 2, 2003
  553 Posts
  Offline
  Sep 14, 2004, 4:29 am

  ▲▼

  Paul:

  It is based on an average of 8 hours. Wich should be not too different from aprox. 6 hours, but testing a system should be done with the most safety margin.

  Clearly you wish for a system that is fast (let's say top predictions in 10 minutes). I wish I could fly from Europe to Australia in just 10 minutes. But we'll both have to admit that this is currently out of reach.

  Things just are the way they are. I never wanted to create a system that would have to run for hours, but unfortunately there is no work around. It just takes that long. Sorry.
• Guru

  Belgium
  Member #2,220
  September 2, 2003
  553 Posts
  Offline
  Sep 14, 2004, 4:30 am

  ▲▼

  Paul:

  It is based on an average of 8 hours. Wich should be not too different from aprox. 6 hours, but testing a system should be done with the most safety margin.

  Clearly you wish for a system that is fast (let's say top predictions in 10 minutes). I wish I could fly from Europe to Australia in just 10 minutes. But we'll both have to admit that this is currently out of reach.

  Things just are the way they are. I never wanted to create a system that would have to run for hours, but unfortunately there is no work around. It just takes that long. Sorry.
• paul762

  

  United Kingdom
  Member #3,002
  December 11, 2003
  542 Posts
  Offline
  Sep 14, 2004, 6:31 am

  ▲▼

  guru, GH software can recognise patterns instantly from hundreds or thousands of draw results, yet LS took 10+ hours for a prediction from the last 3 draws, something doesnt seem quite right, thats all.
• Guru

  Belgium
  Member #2,220
  September 2, 2003
  553 Posts
  Offline
  Sep 14, 2004, 8:51 am

  ▲▼

  Paul:

  Lottosync does not just look at those last 3 draws and do some hocus pocus pattern analysis with the few numbers in it. (that would only take a nanosecond to compute).No, it forces a random flow into the state of the last three draws. It analyses patterns in the data it generates and compares this to the state your lottery game is in. It really takes billions of tries to come to a satisfactory similarity between the generated data and the actual lotto results.

  It takes billions of tries because the similarity must be "unique" enough to allow accuracy.

  So the two softwares are performing completely different tasks, there is absolutely no comparison.
• dragon

  San Diego
  United States
  Member #4,520
  May 1, 2004
  243 Posts
  Offline
  Sep 15, 2004, 1:26 am

  ▲▼

  Quote: Originally posted by Guru on September 14, 2004
  

  ---

  
  
  

  It takes billions of tries because the similarity must be "unique" enough to allow accuracy.

  
  

  ---

  
  

  
  

  What ???

  
   
• LANTERN

  

  Tx
  United States
  Member #4,570
  May 4, 2004
  5,180 Posts
  Offline
  Sep 15, 2004, 11:04 am

  ▲▼

  I might be wrong, but this is what I think. The last 3 draws entered are perhaps sort of like a fingerprint of the "randomness" of the game at that particular time and maybe LottoSync produces a random stream output of numbers and compares the sequence of the numbers of the last 3 draws against it's random output and tries to find the same sequence or as much the same as possible in it's output as it was on the 3 draws entered and when it finds it it follows that sequence and records that numbers that follow it and it does these many times and compares all the numbers that follow the particular sequence against themselves and or records the times that the particular digits come out and maybe the digits that follow after the sequence of the last 3 draws the most often or the most times are the most likely numbers to come out next, provided that the output of LottoSync is "random" in exactly the same way as the randomness that produced those 3 draws that were entered.

  LottoSync tries to reproduce many many times the "randomness" or section(s) of randomness that produced those last 3 draws and then "looks" at what numbers are produced next after that particular section of randomness, does this many times and maybe the numbers that follow it that come out the most often or times are the ones that have the most chance of coming out the next time or on the next draw.

  But since they say that you can't predict "randomness or random"  it can only come close.

  It's impossible to exactly emulate the conditions that produced those 3 draws or numbers and to , make things worse, every new draw the conditions are not exactly the same, so the conditions that produced the first set of draw numbers was not exactly the sames as the conditions that produced the second set of numbers and also the 3rd set of numbers and so the conditions won't be the same for the next set of numbers to come out next either.

  So if all of these is true, then that is why is so hard for LottoSync to come out with winning numbers, it's trying to do the impossible or what they say that it's impossible, it's trying to reproduce a past random dvent many times and to predict a "random" dvent that is yet to happen, based on reproductions of the past random dvent and the sequences of numbers that follow it (the reproductions).

  But of course, I might be wrong.

  BibleOnline  ParishesOnline  ChristianRadioOnline   MassOnline   Mass

  "Ten measures of beauty descended to the world, nine were taken by Jerusalem."