Top list creating bias?
Printed From: Progarchives.com
Category: Site News, Newbies, Help and Improvements
Forum Name: Help us improve the site
Forum Description: Help us improve the forums, and the site as a whole
URL: http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=50299
Printed Date: February 24 2025 at 16:38
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Top list creating bias?
Posted By: Desoc
Subject: Top list creating bias?
Date Posted: July 20 2008 at 12:05
|
Isn't it peculiar that only 6 albums qualify for the 2008 top list, and we're soon writing August? The equivalent 2007 list counts 45 albums. There are three explanations: 1) 2007 was a better year. I doubt it. 2) More albums will qualify in the coming months. Yes, very probable, but that many? Such a steep curve? 3) The threshold to qualify for the "official" list, 25 reviews and rating above 3.5, is too high. Too few albums enter the list, and those that do, are subject to massive review thrashing by those who do not think it deserves a place in the top. If this threshold was lower, more albums would be included, and people would distribute their antipathies more evenly. Another point against the high threshold is that it really is a critique against the top list algorithm. If albums with fewer than 25 ratings, or at least 10 ratings, doesn't deserve a place in the top 10 in July, then the algorithm is too biased in favor of albums with few ratings...Suggestion for improvement:
1. Make "no reviews" and "no rating" the standard for the official list
2. Continue to allow people to make their own standards for thresholds, and allow computers to remember the settings
3. Construct an understandable algorithm
|
Replies:
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: July 20 2008 at 12:09
|
don't agree with the original monkeying around.... but at the same time can understand the logic behind it... if only 5.. or 15 people bother to review it... how can it be considered a 'top' release. The prog world is full of great albums that few have heard...
------------- The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip |
Posted By: Desoc
Date Posted: July 20 2008 at 12:11
| ? "Monkeying around"? |
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: July 20 2008 at 12:13
|
I remember some time back.... M@X screwed around with the parameters of the top lists.. and has tinkered with them... I think minimum reviews became a part of that
------------- The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip |
Posted By: Desoc
Date Posted: July 20 2008 at 12:24
| Ah, I remember too - I think the option to filter by reviews and ratings is fine, but I think the standard filter is excluding too many from the "official" list, that's it. |
Posted By: T.Rox
Date Posted: July 23 2008 at 10:18
SNAP! 
http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=48496 - http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=48496 ------------- "Without prog, life would be a mistake." ...with apologies to Friedrich Nietzsche |
Posted By: Slartibartfast
Date Posted: July 23 2008 at 23:28
|
It's actually a little fun the results that the various algorithms (if I am using the right term) produce. This one was once listed as one of the top albums of 1966: http://www.progarchives.com/Review.asp?id=135711 - http://www.progarchives.com/Review.asp?id=135711 It seems that there is a certain floor or ceiling criteria or criterion that albums have to pass to make the lists now. ------------- Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened... 
|