POV-Ray : Newsgroups : irtc.stills : Website Update Server Time: 28 Sep 2020 19:16:04 GMT
  Website Update (Message 7 to 16 of 16)  
<<< Previous 6 Messages Goto Initial 10 Messages
From: Shay
Subject: Re: Website Update
Date: 23 Mar 2007 17:40:00
Message: <46041f00$1@news.povray.org>
St. wrote:
>     Any other idea's, let me know here.
> 


Wow! I hadn't heard about the IRTC, and here you are starting another
one from the ground up! Some thoughts:

==> Voting

Three category voting is cool in concept but was a failure for the IRTC.
The average standard deviation between categories for each single entry
in 2006 was .59 or just under 3% of the maximum deviation of 20. Proof
that the system did not work.

Streamlining the voting process might encourage more participation.

Scaling the votes would provide a result more consistent with the true
opinions of the voters. By scaling, I mean that the standard deviation
of each voter's votes would be "corrected" to 1. This would be very easy
to automate. Here's an example:

UNSCALED:
        entry1 entry2 entry3 entry4 entry5 entry6 entry7 stan_dev
voter1     11     10      7      8      7      8      7     1.60
voter2     16     15     12     13     14     12      6     3.26
voter3     16     15     10     13      6     11      8     3.64
voter4     16     11      6     16     11      6     16     4.50
voter5     12      9      9     12     10      6      9     2.07
voter6     16      9     14     16     15     10      8     3.46
voter7      0     20     20     20     20     20     20     7.56
Total:     87     89     78     98     83     73     74
Rank:       3      2      5      1      4      7      6

See the problem? Six of the Seven voters preferred entry1, but because
of the "deviant" way in which voter7 ranked the images, entry1 is in
third place. Here's the "scaled" version:

SCALED:
        entry1 entry2 entry3 entry4 entry5 entry6 entry7 stan_dev
voter1  10.62  10.00   8.13   8.75   8.13   8.75   8.13     1.00
voter2  11.84  11.53  10.61  10.92  11.23  10.61   8.77     1.00
voter3  11.65  11.37  10.00  10.82   8.90  10.27   9.45     1.00
voter4  11.33  10.22   9.11  11.33  10.22   9.11  11.33     1.00
voter5  10.97   9.52   9.52  10.97  10.00   8.07   9.52     1.00
voter6  11.74   9.71  11.16  11.74  11.45  10.00   9.42     1.00
voter7   8.68  11.32  11.32  11.32  11.32  11.32  11.32     1.00
Total:  76.83  73.68  69.85  75.86  71.25  68.14  67.95
Rank:       1      3      5      2      4      6      7

Entry1 is now in first place, as most of the voters believe it should
be. This system isn't perfect, but it is an improvement. There is
nothing wrong about the way voter7 voted. There will always be those who
see the world in 0s and 20s. There will always be those who see the
world in 2s and 3s (a problem for everyone else, because 2s and 3s guy
can't vote for his own entry). All types of voting should be weighed
equally.

Here are the formulas for this scaling if you are interested:
SD = Standard Deviation for a set of values
A = average of all values in the set
N = number of values in the set
Set = the set

SD = pow(sum(pow(Set[0]-A, 2)+pow(Set[0]-A, 2)+...), 1/2)

Subtract the Average of all values from each single value and
Square the result. Then, add all of the squared values together and take
the square root of that.

To adjust the standard deviation of a set, just ...

10 + (value-10)/SD

for each value in the set. The 10 could be anything or nothing. It's
there to make the results look like IRTC numbers.

==> Participation

I've always though the IRTC should be a freeware only competition and
that a name should be chosen which invites Scan Line rendered as well as
Ray Traced entries. I would be nice to see the Pixie, Wings, etc.
communities encouraged to participate.

I like the idea of the continuous Tina Chep topic. Will there be a
rating system? I'm going to think on Tina Chep and try to come up with
something. Are you in need of $$ contributions?

 -Shay


Post a reply to this message

From: sdfdf
Subject: Re: Website Update
Date: 8 Apr 2007 15:05:03
Message: <web.46190486f73787dd20b85cc60@news.povray.org>
Recommend a website http://www.518bb.com/index.html ,it provide automatic
voting program design service to implement auto vote by computer and poll
increasing without human attendance. The software for a voting poll
developed by us adopts intelligent identification technique, which is not
limited by any IP, identifying code and so on. The website provides
automatic website voter, auto vote software and so on.

to found more software,you can search keywords such as:
http://www.518bb.com/index.html , automatic website voter,automatic website
voting program, online automatic voting software, online automatic voter,
auto vote, cheating votes ,how to cheat online vote, auto voting program ,
automatic vote, free program for auto vote ,website voting software
,automatic poll,auto voting software ,automatic voting website,auto voting
,do automated voting,voting software online


Post a reply to this message

From: Mike the Elder
Subject: Re: Website Update
Date: 9 Apr 2007 18:40:01
Message: <web.461a8698f73787ddf30be9d60@news.povray.org>
Shay <not### [at] notmailcom> wrote:

> Scaling the votes would provide a result more consistent with the true
> opinions of the voters. By scaling, I mean that the standard deviation
> of each voter's votes would be "corrected" to 1. This would be very easy
> to automate. Here's an example:
> ...
> See the problem? Six of the Seven voters preferred entry1, but because
> of the "deviant" way in which voter7 ranked the images, entry1 is in
> third place.


"Those who cast the votes decide nothing. Those who count the votes decide
everything".
-Iosif Vissarionovich Dzhugashvili

Mere mathematical correction might be insufficient for dealing with those
who cast "deviant" votes. Perhaps we could establish re-education centers
where the "voter7s" of the world could become acquainted with the joys of
voting with the herd.

Moo.


Post a reply to this message

From: stm31415
Subject: Re: Website Update
Date: 14 Apr 2007 04:55:02
Message: <web.46205d7ff73787ddfc02165f0@news.povray.org>
> "Those who cast the votes decide nothing. Those who count the votes decide
> everything".
> -Iosif Vissarionovich Dzhugashvili
>


Oddly enough, there is no possible way --- it is literally IMPOSSIBLE --- to
create a method of voting (other than one person votes as a dictator) that
will avoid this problem of the majority of people being unhappy. Many
systems make it mildly less likey, but there is no single system in which
it won't happen sometimes. The guy who proved that won the nobel in
economics, as I recall.

-
Sam Bleckley


Post a reply to this message

From: Greg M  Johnson
Subject: Re: Website Update
Date: 20 Apr 2007 02:09:38
Message: <462820e2@news.povray.org>
I fully agree with Shay's analysis of there being a problem.

The solution I came up with for the first shortest code contest was to have
folks rank their favorite six entries. That way the 0 vs 20 scenario was
out.


Shay wrote:

> 
> See the problem? Six of the Seven voters preferred entry1, but because
> of the "deviant" way in which voter7 ranked the images, entry1 is in
> third place. Here's the "scaled" version:


Post a reply to this message

From: Greg M  Johnson
Subject: Re: Website Update
Date: 20 Apr 2007 02:10:39
Message: <4628211f@news.povray.org>
Cool.  I'm honored it's being put to use. 

St. wrote:

> 
>      The next one will be 'RTC' - Ray-Tracing Competition. This will be
>      set
> with a topic chosen by using the system that Greg Johnson came up with
> whereby old book titles are used as the topic, (see other posts).


Post a reply to this message

From: stm31415
Subject: Re: Website Update
Date: 21 Apr 2007 15:05:02
Message: <web.462a27f6f73787ddfc02165f0@news.povray.org>
"Greg M. Johnson" <pte### [at] thecommononethatstartswithYcom> wrote:
> I fully agree with Shay's analysis of there being a problem.
>
> The solution I came up with for the first shortest code contest was to have
> folks rank their favorite six entries. That way the 0 vs 20 scenario was
> out.
>
>


Yeah, this method is so much cleaner --- and lets you concentrate on
commenting, rather than trying to wiggle the scores into a ranking you
like. I use a top five ranking on meetsoup.com, but it's the same concept.
(Actually, I wanted to go all out to instant runoffs, but that seemed a
little much)

-Sam


Post a reply to this message

From: John VanSickle
Subject: Re: Website Update
Date: 26 Apr 2007 23:34:14
Message: <463136f6@news.povray.org>
stm31415 wrote:
> "Greg M. Johnson" <pte### [at] thecommononethatstartswithYcom> wrote:
> 
>>I fully agree with Shay's analysis of there being a problem.
>>
>>The solution I came up with for the first shortest code contest was to have
>>folks rank their favorite six entries. That way the 0 vs 20 scenario was
>>out.
>>
>>
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, this method is so much cleaner --- and lets you concentrate on
> commenting, rather than trying to wiggle the scores into a ranking you
> like. I use a top five ranking on meetsoup.com, but it's the same concept.
> (Actually, I wanted to go all out to instant runoffs, but that seemed a
> little much)

Another possible voting mechanism is to put all of the anims in a binary 
tree, like a sports tournament.  Each voter gets their own tree, 
populated randomly, and lacking their own entry if they're an entrant. 
Then each voter goes through each pair, choosing one to advance to the 
next level, until they've picked first, second, 3-4, 5-6-7-8, and so on.

Then count the number of wins that each entry gets from all voters.

Regards,
John


Post a reply to this message

From: mcjohn87
Subject: Re: Website Update
Date: 12 Aug 2009 00:40:01
Message: <web.4a820ec5f73787dde00227790@news.povray.org>
thanks so much for useful info
[url=http://globolstaff.com/][color=#FFFFFF][u]website update[/u][/color][/url]


Post a reply to this message

From: mcjohn87
Subject: Re: Website Update
Date: 12 Aug 2009 00:40:01
Message: <web.4a820f26f73787dde00227790@news.povray.org>
thanks so much for useful info
[url=http://globolstaff.com/][color=#FFFFFF][u]website update[/u][/color][/url]


Post a reply to this message

<<< Previous 6 Messages Goto Initial 10 Messages

Copyright 2003-2008 Persistence of Vision Raytracer Pty. Ltd.