Open slankas opened 10 years ago
Done! See email. Not the filenames are different fro this one and there are more files, as you had a different strategy for choosing unique files (not based on filenames as I did)
I'm reopening this issue. How difficult would it be to replicate the features that were used in the original EUSES paper? I'll send a longer e-mail with justification for why this is desirable in a longer e-mail (one to reduce surface attack area, and the other to replicate the EUSES experiment).
See the list of 14 metrics: http://cse.unl.edu/~grother/papers/weuse05.pdf
@barik To ease the discussion, here is the list.
We we already have: 5
What I can obtain easily with the existing output: 7, 8, 10, 11, 12
What I can obtain less easily with the existing output: 6 (I need to look into to the distinguish the types and how the EUSES paper did it exactly) 9 (I need to do more detailed function analysis)
For which we need a new run: 1, 2, 3, 4 We do not make the distinction between "input" cells and other cells. 13, 14 And I have never analyzed this, so it might take long to know how to
Let me know how you want me to proceed based on this info.
Great. Let's proceed by trying to do the ones that we can do (7, 8, 10, 11, 12). For the metrics that we can't do (maybe because it takes too much effort), we'll just say so in the paper ("Our tool does not make a distinction between input cells and other cells...").
Doing 6 and 9 would be really useful. 9 particularly.
I'll take a stab at 13 and 14 and we can just join the results. I think I might have a hacky way to detect those by creating an Excel automation object directly in .NET.
Thanks a lot.
Okay, I'll try to make a new analysis with 7, 8, 10 to 12 and I'll see about 6 and 9. Probably will be (my) tomorrow.
I can do 6 now.
Awesome! I have 7, 8, 10, 11, 12 and 9. Emailing it now for the Enron set.
Files sent at 8:20 est to Felienne