Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Filter full results to only keep differing results #43

Open
Gbury opened this issue Jul 17, 2020 · 4 comments
Open

Filter full results to only keep differing results #43

Gbury opened this issue Jul 17, 2020 · 4 comments

Comments

@Gbury
Copy link
Collaborator

Gbury commented Jul 17, 2020

On a view such as https://benchpress.cedeela.fr/show_table/res-20200515T222015-2eed2c42-3d64-4611-956f-341d3b2d54ab.sqlite/?offset=0 , it would be useful to be able to list only the results that differ between provers (and this list would be linked to by the numbers in the comparison table of https://benchpress.cedeela.fr/show/res-20200515T222015-2eed2c42-3d64-4611-956f-341d3b2d54ab.sqlite , like is done for each provers' individual results)

@iguerNL
Copy link

iguerNL commented Jul 17, 2020

You can even go one step further and imagine showing:

  • differing results: sat / unsat vs unknown / timeout / memout
  • conflicting results: sat (or unsat) vs unsat (or sat)

with a prioritization of showing conflicting results, as it implies a potential soundness bug in the tool(s).

@c-cube
Copy link
Member

c-cube commented Jul 17, 2020

note that when viewing a file, you already should get a list of errors (per prover), and summary tables with comparisons between provers, including conflicting instances. Then you can click on these to get to these conflicting files.

But in general, yes, the UI could use more cross linking and filtering :)

@iguerNL
Copy link

iguerNL commented Jul 17, 2020

Ah yes, didn't notice it. Guillaume just showed me the tool.

@c-cube
Copy link
Member

c-cube commented Nov 27, 2021

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants