OpenEuphoria

Re: data analysis

• Posted by Kat <gertie at PELL.NET> Jan 16, 2001
• 458 views

Graeme, since you did that amazing pattern finding code,
i was wondering what your thoughts would be on this problem...

given:
<any> !m pittsbourgh
<[Tiggr]> pittsbourgh = PITSBERG CVCCCVCC CVCVC 11312
<any> !m pittsburg
<[Tiggr]> pittsburg = PITSBERG CVCCCVCC CVCVC 11312
<any> !m pittsburgh
<[Tiggr]> pittsburgh = PITSBERG CVCCCVCC CVCVC 11312
<any> !m pittsberg
 <[Tiggr]> pittsberg = PITSBERG CVCCCVCC CVCVC 11312

there is still one piece of relavant data missing: word comparisons, for the
patterns, for in the above instances, "pittsbourgh" vs "pittsburgh" might
return (s=pittsb,d=o,s=urgh) or some representation containing the data
that "pittsb" is the same in both, "o" is different, and "urgh" is the same in
both. The location within the word is not so important at the moment; and i
have made the decision that the first word is the longer of the two, just to
standardize. As you can see in the above printout, i currently have 3
pieces of info: the Metaphoneized word (essentially a rough usa phonetic
spelling), then the placement of consonants and vowels, and finally that
placement with redundancies removed, and i'd like to be able to pass any
of the three to the comparison code. The above example is possibly easy,
since there is a big section of each word at the very start that is the same,
my problem is in the resync of the comparison after that 'o'. Is this possible
without the puter being bogged down all day in the comparison?

Kat