[Bloat] grading bloat better

[jb]

It is done
under the trimmed mean method, that would be a "C" grade result.



On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 11:46 AM, jb <justin at dslr.net> wrote:

> Actually I think the concept I need is the trimmed mean.
> throwing away the highest couple of values (lowest couple are not to be
> thrown away because they can't be errant).
> It isn't perfect but it would help.
>
> On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 11:39 AM, jb <justin at dslr.net> wrote:
>
>> A while ago I changed from mean to median with the reasoning being that
>> one spike to a crazy level was not representative of bloat but instead
>> representative of a network stall or other anomaly. Graphs that were nearly
>> all good samples with one outlier were being unfairly graded poorly.
>>
>> But this example has the opposite issue - the median of this set of
>> samples is the first half where everything is ok. Hence the good score.
>> Using a mean would be correct for this sample.
>> What should happen is to throw away a couple (max) outliers first, then
>> do a mean to avoid punishing the results that come in as good but include
>> one errant measurement.
>>
>> thanks
>> -Justin
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 11:16 PM, Dave Taht <dave.taht at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> This has major bloat happening at the end of the upload test. Which
>>> worries me - here, at a gbit.
>>>
>>> http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/5284047
>>>
>>> --
>>> Dave Täht
>>> Let's go make home routers and wifi faster! With better software!
>>> http://blog.cerowrt.org
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Bloat mailing list
>>> Bloat at lists.bufferbloat.net
>>> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat
>>>
>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.bufferbloat.net/pipermail/bloat/attachments/20161013/2e49f0bf/attachment-0002.html>