It should lose by a smallbut clear amount, since it already lost a 1-1 direct matchup, and you stated in another post that 1-vote matchups were best.
I never said that because one person voted on it, that it made it a valid match up. I never said 1-1 matchups were the best way to compare 2 pictures. I said that if you have a 100 votes, it is best to spread them out to 100 different matchups. Obviously individual 1-1 matchups would be less reliable but they would also have insignificant weighting because of the number of matchups you'd be able to have.
I didn't pick her at random, Wilde lost a 1-1 matchup to her
Again... a 1-1 matchup, which is irrelevant in the grand scheme of things.
I don't understand that. Were the other matchups in conflict? How do you decide which votes are useful and which ones aren't?
The other matches were thrown out because the competitor ended up not being in her range. If you have enough support to believe a picture is an 8, losing to a 9.5 means nothing. Also winning against a 3 means nothing. And losing to a 3 can be written off as a fraudulent vote as can winning against a 9.5. So if a picture does 50/50 against a large enough number of competitors between 8.5 and 7.5 I conclude they are an 8, even if they have beaten some 9s and lost to some 5s.
That is actually rather odd. The pool system I wnvisioned and described to you would peobably not see much change from initial placement, unless a pic showed signs of large numbers of erroneous votes. I mean, the pic itself doesn't change, so if the rating is done right there is no reason for the rating to change much, generally. An exception would be the top 100, which would be off limits to initial placement. Pics would have to battle there way up ro the top spot. It would give fans pics to root for, and to keep coming back to see how they are doing.
Yeah well, I can do more with less votes than your system
Hmmm. I think proper statistical methods will give apretty reliable number.
Prove it... write the algorithm. I think your method will fail spectacularly.
That is overstating things, no stastical method reaches 100% accuracy. The point of dividing into 3 decimal places is so you don't have an average of 6000 pics on average tied at any one rating value. 4 decimal places would reduce the average number of girls in each pool to 60, based on your 1.2 million current photos. Of course, as you add photosu , the a erage number at each rating value will go up.
It also predetermines how many will be in each group right? So even if I upload 1 million 9s, they won't be room for them all as a 9.
I need your database schema
No you don't. I'm not handing that out. You don't need to know how the black box works. Just define the interface that you need for your algorithm to work. I will give you a pool of matchups with at least x votes, whatever you want that to be. You can start with the BotD matches. That gives yous 1133 matchups right off the bat.
1. How many 1-1 pic matchups have at least 10 votes? How many have at least 7? How many have at least 5? How many matchups of 3 or 4 have all the votes going one way? The answers to these questions will show the feasibility of different starting confidence requirements.
1133 Battles of the day
There are at least 55,000 match ups with 5 or more votes. This number is only babesrater and only includes votes that had the same winner and loser. So it would skip over matches that are 4-1, 3-2, 2-3 or 4-1. I'll have to make a similar table for match ups and convert existing votes into that to get a more accurate count. It also doesn't include matches that could be used in a 5 vote matchup like 3-0, 3-1
If you make it 10 vote match ups, it will be at least
What are the daily, weekly, and monthly voting patterns? That is, how many votes do you get on an average Monday? And the other days of the week? Does it vary by time of the month? Month of the year? Histograms would be good. Specific answers to this group of questions would provide guidance in how quickly we can boost the number of votes on partially completed matchups to levels sufficient to provide somewhat reliable data points.
It's pretty steady. Don't worry about how quickly votes come in. I will give you matchups with X number of votes. That could be 50000 in a day, it could be 0. Either way your algorithm should be able rank them.
The goal of these initial assessments is to gain some real numbers about how many pics would have actual ratings after an initial population of rating pools, and provide an estimate of how fast we can get additional pics out of the unrated state and into initial rating pools.
Again, that isn't really your concern. Just worry about correctly ranking what I can give you. If your match size is 5, expect
my dad died yesterday morning.
Sorry for you loss
