Progarchives.com has always (since 2002) relied on banners ads to cover web hosting fees and all.
Please consider supporting us by giving monthly PayPal donations and help keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.
/PAlogo_v2.gif "Progarchives.com Homepage") |
Albums missing in charts |
Post Reply 
|
| Author | |
MikeEnRegalia 
Special Collaborator 
Honorary Collaborator Joined: April 22 2005 Location: Sweden Status: Offline Points: 21121 |
 Post Options
 Thanks(0)
 Quote Reply
 Topic: Albums missing in chartsPosted: June 15 2023 at 01:17 |
|
Today I checked out the top albums of 2023:
I was surprised to see that it's only 70 entries, and Haken - Fauna is missing. I only discovered this by accident, since I was writing a review for the album, but there surely are many more rated albums of 2023 than the 70 which are currently shown. So for some reason, some albums are missing! Could be a serious problem in the database ...
|
|
 |
|
|
Cristi
Special Collaborator
Crossover / Prog Metal Teams Joined: July 27 2006 Location: wonderland Status: Offline Points: 43510 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: June 15 2023 at 01:51 |
It's not that albums are missing, select a number of ratings and see what comes next. |
|
|
|
|
Logan
Forum & Site Admin Group
Site Admin Joined: April 05 2006 Location: Vancouver, BC Status: Offline Points: 35743 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: June 15 2023 at 02:10 |
|
I almost always set "Filter: Minimum Number of Ratings" to 1, and set "Filter: Minimum Average Rating Value" to 1 as otherwise I often don't get 100 results when it is set at the default. This list I also set to the top 250 albums: CLICK HERE
What's then interesting about that list is that Haken's Fauna is ranked at 250 (just makes it in) with 3.64 and 139 ratings. At 249 we find Initial Mass with a 3.0 and three ratings, at 240 also a 3.0 with 3 ratings. The resulkts are counterintuitive, at least to this guy who is not as learned as he would like to be when it comes to such algorithms (trying to learn more for a little project of mine). |
|
|
|
|
Logan
Forum & Site Admin Group
Site Admin Joined: April 05 2006 Location: Vancouver, BC Status: Offline Points: 35743 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: June 15 2023 at 02:31 |
|
I cannot edit my last post here, and the page keeps loading due to a script it seems... I meant to say at 248 also a 3.0 with 3 ratings. I actually can't seem to edit my posts where Mike and I have posted, tried several threads and edit works on all others I checked. I wonder if it has to do with your signature, is that running a script here even though I only see a hypertext link? Finding it really hard to post here since the page will not fully load, but others do. I wish I had No Script to check.
|
|
|
|
|
MikeEnRegalia
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator Joined: April 22 2005 Location: Sweden Status: Offline Points: 21121 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: June 15 2023 at 02:48 |
|
I see - that's a little f_ed up
 Took me a while to understand the parameters. If I run the search with 0/0/1, Fauna comes out as the last album at position 250: If I run the search with 0/0/0 (the default values), as in my initial post, only 36 albums of 2023 even qualify. The settings mean that out of all the albums of 2023, only those that have more than the average number of ratings will be shown, and only those that have an "above average" rating are shown. Fauna is filtered out because it has too low a rating (slightly below average), but ironically that's because it has more ratings than many of the other albums, and the more ratings an album accumulates, the more the average drops. Here's a query that works for albums like Fauna - set minimum ratings to 40: The underlying problem is that releases which attract a lot of ratings (high-profile artists) will receive a lot of exaggerated ratings in both directions, while releases which are more obscure tend to attract exaggerated ratings in only one direction (higher than justified). This skews the average rating upward ...
|
|
|
|
|
MikeEnRegalia
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator Joined: April 22 2005 Location: Sweden Status: Offline Points: 21121 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: June 15 2023 at 02:50 |
My signature is only an ordinary image, no other magic is required. But maybe there's some script in the forum software which waits for all images to load until it does other things ...
|
|
|
|
|
Logan
Forum & Site Admin Group
Site Admin Joined: April 05 2006 Location: Vancouver, BC Status: Offline Points: 35743 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: June 15 2023 at 03:00 |
|
^ That's it, the images just were not loading before and so the page would not load. I could not see them, just your "Recently listened to" hypertext link, but now they came up (took a little while).
|
|
|
|
|
Logan
Forum & Site Admin Group
Site Admin Joined: April 05 2006 Location: Vancouver, BC Status: Offline Points: 35743 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: June 15 2023 at 03:04 |
|
And now even though I see them, that prevents me from editing my post and it makes it slow to be abe to post (took me twenty minutes to get that last message though). I don't know if anyone else has problems with them. With Firefox I could easily block them, but using Opera nd not so familiar with it. It is causing issues with me in all of the threads you posted in.
|
|
|
|
|
MikeEnRegalia
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator Joined: April 22 2005 Location: Sweden Status: Offline Points: 21121 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: June 15 2023 at 03:13 |
|
^ I think it's because the image is too big. It's because it's a png, not a jpg. I cut that in half by only showing three releases, and I'll look into reducing the file size further ... the previous image was about 1.3MB
|
|
|
|
|
Saperlipopette!
Forum Senior Member 
Joined: December 20 2010 Location: Tomorrowland Status: Offline Points: 11589 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: June 15 2023 at 03:33 |
 |
|
|
|
|
Logan
Forum & Site Admin Group
Site Admin Joined: April 05 2006 Location: Vancouver, BC Status: Offline Points: 35743 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: June 15 2023 at 03:44 |
|
^ Hah, even worse.
|
|
|
|
|
MikeEnRegalia
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator Joined: April 22 2005 Location: Sweden Status: Offline Points: 21121 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: June 15 2023 at 03:58 |
|
The question is, why do albums like Alluvium - Initial Mass have such a high QWR? I checked out that album, it has three normal ratings. Is it because the ratings were done by collabs? What could give them that much weight?
|
|
|
|
|
MikeEnRegalia
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator Joined: April 22 2005 Location: Sweden Status: Offline Points: 21121 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: June 15 2023 at 03:59 |
|
Another possibility would be that something is dragging Fauna down, but that's less likely, given that its QWR is close to the average.
|
|
|
|
|
MikeEnRegalia
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator Joined: April 22 2005 Location: Sweden Status: Offline Points: 21121 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: June 15 2023 at 05:10 |
|
@Logan changed the signature from png to jpg and kept it below 175px height (the forum CSS sets that as maximum height). 1.3MB -> 80KB
|
|
|
|
|
Lewian
Prog Reviewer 
Joined: August 09 2015 Location: Italy Status: Offline Points: 14691 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: June 15 2023 at 07:30 |
|
These things have been discussed before. The algorithm (QWR) basically will push everything in the direction of the average (which itself will depend on filters). If something has lots of ratings, its QWR will be similar to its own average rating. If something has very few ratings, the algorithm will implicitly assume that lots of people who didn't vote for this would find the album average, so that any album with few ratings will have a QWR that is close to the overall average. For albums rated *below* the overall average, this can have the weird effect reported here; if the overall average is something like 3.7 and the Haken album is at 3.64, its QWR will be about 3.64, slightly larger than this. If something only has a single rating (and be it 1 or 2), it will have a QWR close to 3.7, potentially higher than Haken. I think this idea is not so bad *above* the average, however implications *below* the average are rather nonsensical. And this is just how it is...
Edited by Lewian - June 15 2023 at 07:31 |
|
|
|
|
MikeEnRegalia
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator Joined: April 22 2005 Location: Sweden Status: Offline Points: 21121 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: June 15 2023 at 07:40 |
|
^ Interesting! 15 years ago I discussed this a LOT with M@x, and we came up with a different solution that I still use at TYM. It's nice to see that PA has progressed to doing something different. But I agree, that particular effect is weird.
|
|
|
|
|
omphaloskepsis
Forum Senior Member
Joined: October 19 2011 Location: Texas Status: Offline Points: 6339 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: June 15 2023 at 09:04 |
|
Good god! Fauna at 250. I've listened to Fauna at least 30 times. I luxuriate in Fauna fun.
Seriously, it's a great album. Could be my favorite Haken album. The Mountain is objectively better, but I enjoy Fauna more.
|
|
|
|
|
MikeEnRegalia
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator Joined: April 22 2005 Location: Sweden Status: Offline Points: 21121 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: June 15 2023 at 09:06 |
|
^ Virus is now my favorite, but by a narrow margin.
|
|
|
|
|
omphaloskepsis
Forum Senior Member
Joined: October 19 2011 Location: Texas Status: Offline Points: 6339 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: June 15 2023 at 09:22 |
Another great album. The synergistic timing of Virus was wild. As Haken albums float by, my amazement grows.
|
|
|
|
|
Post Reply
|
|
| Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |
Topic Options
MikeEnRegalia wrote: