Home -> Usenet -> comp.databases.theory -> Re: Aggregates: Largest Groups

Re: Aggregates: Largest Groups

From: Sampo Syreeni <decoy_at_iki.fi>
Date: Sat, 10 Apr 2010 12:51:23 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <75ae9706-8c33-41b6-b035-0087667c4ee7_at_z6g2000yqz.googlegroups.com> 






On Apr 10, 6:58 pm, paul c <toledobythe..._at_oohay.ac> wrote:



> An average of averages is generally not equal to an overall average.





No, and this gives rise to one of the most annoying statistical
paradoxes out there as well: the Simpson-Yule one.



Still, we can always guess as to the intention behind the original
question, and go from there. Perhaps that means that we would end up
with an entire family of algorithms instead of just one. Let's say,
variations on a theme. There's no harm in that -- the number would be
few, and probably somebody somewhere would find each one of them
useful in time.



That doesn't really impact my point about data languages being short
in expressive power, though. I doubt any such algorithm or its
criteria could be cleanly and succinctly stated in an existing data
manipulation language.

--
Sampo


Received on Sat Apr 10 2010 - 21:51:23 CEST












Original text of this message