in reply to Re^2: Average Price Algorithm
in thread Average Price Algorithm

ELISHEVA,
demoAllocation ( "Distribution: Limbic~Region", {a => 3, b => 4, c => 2, d => 2}, {'1.0' => 1, '2.0' => 1, '3.0' => 1, '4.0' => 1, '5.0' => 1, '6.0' + => 1, '7.0' => 1, '8.0' => 1, '9.0' => 1, '10.0' => 1, '11.0' => 1 } ); __DATA__ Distribution: Limbic~Region a: 1 @ $2.00 1 @ $3.00 1 @ $9.00 bucket avg: $4.67, deviation: $-1.333 b: 1 @ $1.00 1 @ $10.00 1 @ $11.00 bucket avg: $7.33, deviation: $1.333 c: 1 @ $5.00 1 @ $6.00 1 @ $7.00 bucket avg: $6.00, deviation: $0.000 d: 1 @ $4.00 1 @ $8.00 bucket avg: $6.00, deviation: $0.000

It is easy to show that this is not the best result. Consider a perfect distribution:

Cheers - L~R

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^4: Average Price Algorithm
by GrandFather (Saint) on Feb 03, 2009 at 03:03 UTC

    It is not just not a best result, it is an invalid result! b wanted 4 units but got 3 and c wanted 2 units but got 3.


    Perl's payment curve coincides with its learning curve.