Why aren the scores for the reference platform all 1s?
To derive the MPI2007 score, the medians of the measured times are divided by the reference times, and the Geometric Mean of these quotients is the actual score. If you look at the scores for the reference platform you will see that they vary from 0.96 to 1.03, while you would expect them to all be 1.00 since the reference times are being divided by themselves. There are two reasons that this is not the case: • The divisors are rounded to the closest integer for simplicity. More precise floating-point numbers could have been used to achieve quotients of 1.00, but this would imply an unrealistic degree of accuracy in the measurements. • Measurements of the reference platform are gathered under reportable conditions, and are subject to the same run-to-run variations as with any other platform.
To derive the MPI2007 score, the medians of the measured times are divided by the reference times, and the Geometric Mean of these quotients is the actual score. If you look at the scores for the reference platform you will see that they vary from 0.96 to 1.03, while you would expect them to all be 1.00 since the reference times are being divided by themselves. There are two reasons that this is not the case: • The divisors are rounded to the closest integer for simplicity. More precise floating-point numbers could have been used to achieve quotients of 1.00, but this would imply an unrealistic degree of accuracy in the measurements. • Measurements of the reference platform are gathered under reportable conditions, and are subject to the same run-to-run variations as with any other platform. An initial calibration measurement was used to derive the reference times used in the report-generation tools; then a second measurement, with the finished tools, was used to generate the posted re
