Close

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 11
  1. #1
    New User nuvigil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Posts
    4
    Post Thanks / Like
    Rep Power
    0

    Theoretical Basis for Difficulty Classification

    Just dumping some conjecture establishing a theoretical basis for an empirical approach to map classification. No need to respond unless you find it interesting.

    1.) Statistics Classification Model
    Uses only statistics already available in surf-timer SQL
    Code:
    (# of attempts prior to completion/client rank)+(time in zone/client rank)/2

    Client ranks are distributed. Exclusionary criteria include maps: newer than X days, and/or insufficient client sample N, and ST.D >= 1.5(Q3-Q1)


    The remainder is a raw-score product, with advantages:
    • Absolute z-scoring allows quantitative map comparison
    • High positive distribution bias (should) correlate with the most competitive maps (the compliment to this is the map with the lowest ST.D VAR in !pr distribution)
    • Map distribution curves may prove helpful for the ambitious map creators
      • Bimodality as an indicator of skill bottlenecks
      • This can be extrapolated down to the stage-level although it probably isn't worth the effort
      • Conversely this can be extrapolated globally (beyond KSF servers) to calculate map Standard Error (contingency: congruent server settings) to have quantitative representation of human error


    Beyond human error, external variables are network ping and hardware input lag. At this point we're far from the existing subjective ranking system, though I'd be surprised to find much difference.

    Raw-scores can be converted into the existing 6-tier system, the difference being rank shifting phenomenon with the introduction of new maps that become eligible according to the exclusionary criteria aforementioned—if the point system were ever based on empirical classification this would disrupt the continuity of ranks/point awards.

    2.) Computational Path Analysis
    A computational geometric analysis from raw map files outputting the upper and lower limits of the map completion envelope—there's a reason I call this all theoretical.

    That's all. This is not a suggestion, just a theoretical discussion mainly for educational purposes.




    When I wrote the formula in OP I remember hoping someone else would come along with a new or improved version.
    I am trying to insulate the formula to map popularity, we all know certain maps just don't get played often, but its important to preserve the validity of their rankings for objectivity. The impact of this is debatable but could be solved with weighted ranks.
    Last edited by nuvigil; 05-07-2018 at 08:03 AM.

  2. Dislikes supremee disliked this post
  3. #2
    KSF Member Stevo_97's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    180
    Post Thanks / Like
    Rep Power
    26
    I see.
    03:14 - MIKE: you should have fucking warned me
    03:14 - MIKE: now you have to buy me a new desk
    03:14 - MIKE: cause the boner i got smashed right through it

  4. Thanks supremee thanked for this post
    Likes supremee liked this post
    Dislikes supremee disliked this post
  5. #3
    Regular Poster Silverthing's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    119
    Post Thanks / Like
    Rep Power
    19
    *SPEC* [clefty] Professional S1 Bumper : what teh FUCK is that thread
    *SPEC* [clefty] Professional S1 Bumper : hol shit

  6. Thanks wild, Tomos, supremee thanked for this post
    Likes supremee liked this post
    Dislikes supremee disliked this post
  7. #4
    New User Tomos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2017
    Posts
    5
    Post Thanks / Like
    Rep Power
    0
    wow

  8. Dislikes supremee disliked this post
  9. #5
    Administrator evolv's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    960
    Post Thanks / Like
    Rep Power
    10
    Couldn't this formula allow high ranking players to skew the data by purposely staying within a zone for a long period of time or choosing to make a large number of attempts? Otherwise it would be nice to have a standardized score to compare the average difficulty for players on the server.

  10. Thanks nuvigil thanked for this post
  11. #6
    New User nuvigil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Posts
    4
    Post Thanks / Like
    Rep Power
    0
    It could be manipulated this way, but not quite if data points are only taken from PR information. In order to artificially sabotage the data you'd (theoretically) need a map you have not completed to try and deflate a maps rating. Perhaps you would need multiple people adding negative skew to the dataset, before risking reaching the variance limit on the distribution. But your point is correct in that knowing the specific criteria or formula variables exposes how to manipulate an algorithm.
    Last edited by nuvigil; 05-07-2018 at 08:00 AM.

  12. Likes Stevo_97, supremee liked this post
  13. #7
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    81
    Post Thanks / Like
    Rep Power
    0
    haha mate my heads gone

  14. #8
    KSF Member Kiiru's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    52
    Post Thanks / Like
    Rep Power
    17
    What?
    Mapper & surfer. Umad?

  15. Thanks supremee thanked for this post
  16. #9
    New User nuvigil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Posts
    4
    Post Thanks / Like
    Rep Power
    0
    The idea here for those who are confused is about how maps (specifically surf maps) are classified into tiers. Maps are currently categorized, if I understand correctly, subjectively based on the opinions of various experienced players when a new map arrives. This seems to work fine. It's not a very robust system but I don't think anyone really cares or fusses too much about the rankings because who cares, really. Sometimes I hear people say this t4 is really a upper t3 and that t3 should really be t4. But what does that really mean/how could you fairly rank and then tier every map in comparison with every other map?

    I had all these thoughts about some fancy executable someone had created where you put the map in and it spits out a rating, along with every possible set of input combinations to complete a map, blah blah blah.

    Instead I settled on a more passive approach. Surftimer keeps track of map attempt counts in prinfo, specifically # of attempts before first completion, in addition to pr times data. If you just took every player's first-completion attempts number and averaged it out per map, you could say that harder maps are those which players generally had more attempts until first-completion and fewer for lower-tier maps. But the skill spread between players in surf is just incredibly wide, but we can control for this by weighting that attempt value with listed player rank.

    I have no issue with the way things are, like I said, I was just interested in the problem and thought I'd share.

  17. Likes Louieismyname liked this post
  18. #10
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Posts
    27
    Post Thanks / Like
    Rep Power
    0
    This isnt regular virgin. This is advanced virgin.

  19. Dislikes Sundayy, kulmikasmuna disliked this post

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •