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
Recently, we evaluated the performance of our novel atomic-set computation algorithm [1] against the one implemented in FeatJar. We found that FeatJar, on average, is about 40x slower. Now we are curious to understand whether this difference stems from the algorithm or simply FeatJar's implementation in Java and its use of SAT4J.
As our algorithm should be easy to implement, we are hopeful that this question can be answered without much effort.
Recently, we evaluated the performance of our novel atomic-set computation algorithm [1] against the one implemented in FeatJar. We found that FeatJar, on average, is about 40x slower. Now we are curious to understand whether this difference stems from the algorithm or simply FeatJar's implementation in Java and its use of SAT4J.
As our algorithm should be easy to implement, we are hopeful that this question can be answered without much effort.
[1] https://arxiv.org/abs/2501.12490
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: