Author: Sune Fischer
Date: 05:45:47 12/07/01
Go up one level in this thread
On December 07, 2001 at 07:30:10, David Rasmussen wrote: >Hamming distance is not the only criterion that is important, and as you >yourself point out, you can get some really bad stuff by just going by hamming >distance (although it is unlikely. The example you give is improbable). On the >other hand, the "connection between the quality of hash codes and their Hamming >distance" is quite obvious. If you have very low hamming distance, you are much >more like to get a low-dimensioned vector space. Why is that? If you create a set of vectors with mutually high hamming distances, then you are actually giving them a feature they all have in common. This is against randomness, some should have large distances and some small, this is "more random", random means random in _every_ aspect. If you use 64 bit keys there is probably enough randomness left in the keys so that this is not a problem, but for 32 bit keys it could be a bigger problem. -S.
This page took 0.02 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.