While the french equivalent "pénultième" is rarely heard and considered as pedantic, "antépénultième" is actually much more frequently used to avoid the ugly "avant-avant-dernier" (very really awesome).
It seemed somewhat plausible or serious to me because "ultimate" is slang for "really cool" in India. (At least it was when I was growing up; who knows what the cool kids there say these days.) But I was puzzled because I've spent the majority of my adult life in North America, and never heard "penultimate" used that way.
I was wrong. Apparently it is slang, in some places at least:
> The word penultimate as a slang word seems to have worked its way into common parlance thanks to the slang use of the word ultimate. As a slang term, ultimate means cool rather than last. So the hipster logic may have concluded that if ultimate means cool, then penultimate must mean super cool.
I think it's used in marketing sometimes because it sounds cool, so you'll assume it means something good if you don't understand it. Doesn't come up a lot though.
I shouldn't start on these but I fail to resist, since you bring one of them on the discussion.
This is one of numerous "faux-amis" that are so tricky for native French speakers. While "fameux" has the meaning an English speaker would expect, "Infâme" means odious. Other examples include "éventuellement" that means possibly (and not surely in the future), "actuellement" which translates as "nowadays" (and not really) etc.
It may be chauvinism, but etymological and geographical clues let be believe that most of these are french words that have been imported into English and whose meanings changed radically. Admittedly, some probably share a common latin origin and were declined into similar words but retaining a different subset of their original meanings.
It is often a source of weird misunderstandings between native French and English speakers, neither of which are famous for their mastery at learning foreign languages...
From the article, she says they tried "1.0 / (1 << mj)", which turned out to be slower than the lookup table. May or may not be equivalent to java.lang.Math.scalb, I dunno.
I'm confused by the discussion of multi-lingual corpora. Is it common in topic modeling to consider documents drawn from disjoint vocabularies, or is it just a kind of thought experiment?
Pretty common when you don't control the data source or for multi language goverment agencies (for example in Canada you may have your court case in French if you desire).
If you mean subtracting out all the stars in our entire galaxy, then the night sky would get a lot dimmer. We'd only see the starlight from distant galaxies and the planets of our own solar system. If you mean just the streak across the sky that is the densest part of our galaxy, then there'd just be fainter and more distant stars in our galaxy to take its place. Regardless, it's very hard to know for sure because we reside in the Milky Way and can't see past it.
Oof, this may take a much longer blog post, but here is the very high level basic view.
The basic construction on one doc-sharded server looks like:
1) Maximum valid local_docid
2) A map of local_docid => state (valid, deleted)
3) A map of token_id (indexed term) => map of local_docids to positions in doc.
On document update, you increment the next local docid. You then rip through the doc and extract the tokens. For each token, you insert the docid,position into map (3). Then you add the document to map (2) with state "valid", and finally increment (1).
On query, you first copy (1), then do the typical AND/OR retrieval over (3). Any docids seen higher than (1) are ignored, and any docs retrieved are then filtered by (2).
In this model, (1) is a volatile memory access. (2) and (3) are very similar to this "relativistic hash map".
Deletions are complicated, and usually you filter out invalid docids from (3) as a background compaction process.
DLLs are signed. But they aren't checked every time a DLL is loaded. It absolutely obliterates load time if you have to go through every byte of all your DLLs and hash them. (You have the option to turn this on within the registry, though)
Signing is almost useless in .Net. And it's certainly not in place for security purposes.
