MHB Comparing Methods: Averaging Gaps with Arithmetic/Geometric Mean

  • Thread starter Thread starter nabilaUSTHB
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Mean
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the comparison of two optimization methods, with a focus on calculating the average gap in performance between them. The first method shows a better performance than the second, with an average gap calculated using the arithmetic mean resulting in -4.91%. However, there is contention regarding the accuracy of this calculation, with one participant arguing that the correct average gap should be -3.36% based on a total comparison of the results. The debate highlights the difference between using arithmetic and geometric means for calculating average gaps, with suggestions that the arithmetic mean may distort the overall picture due to the weight of percentage changes. The conversation emphasizes the importance of proper statistical methods in analyzing performance data and suggests consulting educational resources for clarification on the appropriate mean to use.
nabilaUSTHB
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
View attachment 8930
However I have an optimization problem (minimization problem), and the table (attached fill) represents a comparative study between the results of two methods, the first one performed better than the second one and to quantify the effectiveness of the first method we computed the gap which equal to:
GAP=((Method2-method1)/method1)*100

To compute the average gaps I used the arithmetic mean which equal to:
Mean-gaps=-(10+2.47+6.5+0.40+5.18)/5=-4.91%
And in conclusion I sad that method1 improved method 2 by 4.91 on average.
I used the average mean since the gaps results with no significant outliers, and the gaps are independents and not normalized ( normal)!
My question in is In this case which one I should use whether the arithmetic or the geometric mean to compute the average gaps!
 

Attachments

  • tabel.PNG
    tabel.PNG
    8.3 KB · Views: 123
Physics news on Phys.org
Check your calculator or program:

Benchmark2 GAP should be -24.77%; you show -2.47%

Benchmark3 GAP should be -8.58%; you show -6.50%
 
I disagree with your 4.91% results; should be 3.36%.
A comparison after TOTALLING is required:
Code:
    1200        1320  -10.00%
   22000       27450  -24.77%
   48000       52124  - 8.59%
  745000      748000  - 0.40%
  904522      951422  - 5.18%
-----------------------------
 1720722     1780316  - 3.36%

You are using an average of the percentages
which distorts the picture.
As example, you could have a small amount
like 10 increasing to 20 for a 100% increase,
and you would be using the 100% in calculating
the final effect with as much "weight" as the others.
 
Wilmer said:
I disagree with your 4.91% results; should be 3.36%.
A comparison after TOTALLING is required:
Code:
    1200        1320  -10.00%
   22000       27450  -24.77%
   48000       52124  - 8.59%
  745000      748000  - 0.40%
  904522      951422  - 5.18%
-----------------------------
 1720722     1780316  - 3.36%

You are using an average of the percentages
which distorts the picture.
As example, you could have a small amount
like 10 increasing to 20 for a 100% increase,
and you would be using the 100% in calculating
the final effect with as much "weight" as the others.
............
But you have not replied yet...which one I should use in this case arithmetic or geometric mean
 
nabilaUSTHB said:
But you have not replied yet...which one I should use in this case arithmetic or geometric mean
That's YOUR decision...ask your teacher.
I showed you the method that represents the actual percentage change.

In case this helps you:
https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/06/geometricmean.asp
 
nabilaUSTHB, you definitely should use the second one (arithmetic). Why? Cause the final effect is really with as much "weight" as the others. https://bestcalculators.net - will help you make the right choice of calculator you need, to understand all the steps, that lead to the right solution.
 
mikey92 said:
nabilaUSTHB, you definitely should use the second one (arithmetic). Why? Cause the final effect is really with as much "weight" as the others. https://bestcalculators.net - will help you make the right choice of calculator you need, to understand all the steps, that lead to the right solution.
Mikey, that makes no sense. Are you a salesman "in disguise"?:)

Let's take a simple example:
you invest 1000 for 1 year at 5% and 100 for 1 year at 50%:
Code:
Jan.1  Rate   Dec.31
1000    5%    1050
 100   50%     150
------------------
1100    9%    1200
Clear enuff? Same as investing 1100 at 9% for 1 year.

Now, if using your method, then we'd get:
(5 + 50) / 2 = 27.5% : quite ridiculous when the actual is 9%.

You both (you and the OP) need help from your teachers.
I'm outta here!
 

Similar threads

Back
Top