"ratio of averages" weights SLE’17 "Table 4. Normalized global results" #37

1. I've managed to calculate the exact same "Time" values as those shown in SLE’17 Table 4 : starting from these results tables —

   https://sites.google.com/view/energy-efficiency-languages/results

2. So now I understand those normalized Time values show the arithmetic mean of the times for each language —

(language1 time1 + language1 time2 + language1 time3 + language1 timeN) / N

— divided by the arithmetic mean of the times for C language.

In other words, "the ratio of averages" for each language to the average for C.

3. As-far-as-I-can-tell that calculation seems to "weight" each program measurement differently.

For example, because the fannkuch-redux programs are run for ~20x more time than the reverse-complement programs; the un-normalized time fannkuch-redux contributes to the average have more weight than the time reverse-complement contributes to the average.

That may be what was intended.

4. On the other hand, the intention may have been that each program - binary-trees, fannkuch-redux, fasta, reverse-complement - contributed the same weight to the Table 4 average.

If each program was intended to contribute the same weight to the Table 4 average, then Table 4 should show "the average of ratios" ?

https://jlmc.medium.com/understanding-three-simple-statistics-for-data-visualizations-2619dbb3677a

https://dl.acm.org/doi/pdf/10.1145/5666.5673