Update to popularity score algorithm
-
- Posts: 16
- Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2011 9:35 am
- Location: Growls Garden
Re: Update to popularity score algorithm
I second on "Recent" and "All time" high scores... that's what is used by most websites and it works.
-
- Posts: 18
- Joined: Thu Jan 14, 2010 7:56 pm
Re: Update to popularity score algorithm
just appropriately label whichever score.
- page visits (from search engines, links posted elsewhere, and bookmarks).
- survey votes
disclaimer: i don't much notice these types of popularity score things
- page visits (from search engines, links posted elsewhere, and bookmarks).
- survey votes
disclaimer: i don't much notice these types of popularity score things
- Andrew Lee
- Posts: 3063
- Joined: Sat Feb 04, 2006 9:19 am
- Contact:
Re: Update to popularity score algorithm
Here are the popularity scores as of today (minus old scores):
Typhoon 2001 => 13701
VirtuaWin => 12773
TrueCrypt => 11353
Opera => 11174
XnView => 9510
Converber => 9098
FastStone Image Viewer => 8994
Portable Start Menu => 8368
freeCommander => 8105
KeePass => 7727
Compare that with old score inclusive:
FastStone Capture => 196930
Yod'm 3D => 99423
Foxit Reader Portable => 68417
Undelete Plus => 29393
SilentNight Micro CD Burner => 27443
PixaMSN => 20691
EVEREST Home Edition => 19900
Universal Extractor => 19585
CCleaner => 17341
Mozilla Firefox, Portable Edition => 16610
Typhoon 2001 => 13701
VirtuaWin => 12773
TrueCrypt => 11353
Opera => 11174
XnView => 9510
Converber => 9098
FastStone Image Viewer => 8994
Portable Start Menu => 8368
freeCommander => 8105
KeePass => 7727
Compare that with old score inclusive:
FastStone Capture => 196930
Yod'm 3D => 99423
Foxit Reader Portable => 68417
Undelete Plus => 29393
SilentNight Micro CD Burner => 27443
PixaMSN => 20691
EVEREST Home Edition => 19900
Universal Extractor => 19585
CCleaner => 17341
Mozilla Firefox, Portable Edition => 16610
Re: Update to popularity score algorithm
Quite surprising.Andrew Lee wrote:Here are the popularity scores as of today (minus old scores):
Typhoon 2001 => 13701
VirtuaWin => 12773
TrueCrypt => 11353
Opera => 11174
XnView => 9510
Converber => 9098
FastStone Image Viewer => 8994
Portable Start Menu => 8368
freeCommander => 8105
KeePass => 7727
![Surprised :o](./images/smilies/icon_surprised.gif)
And where are Foxit Reader Portable and Undelete Plus
![Question :?:](./images/smilies/icon_question.gif)
The change will be more radical than I thought. (Not sure if it's a good or bad thing.
![Confused :?](./images/smilies/icon_confused.gif)
My YouTube channel | Release date of my 13th playlist: August 24, 2020
Re: Update to popularity score algorithm
What surprises me is that Opera is above Firefox. Does this mean people are switching from Firefox to Opera?SYSTEM wrote:Quite surprising.Andrew Lee wrote:Here are the popularity scores as of today (minus old scores):
Typhoon 2001 => 13701
VirtuaWin => 12773
TrueCrypt => 11353
Opera => 11174Many of these applications aren't well known.
Re: Update to popularity score algorithm
Hardly. While it is possible that it's true, the data doesn't support such conclusion. It says that there are more people trying Opera than Firefox. It can mean many things, but it's likely that on Windows Opera grows faster than Firefox.Hydaral wrote:What surprises me is that Opera is above Firefox. Does this mean people are switching from Firefox to Opera?
ADDED: No, I think jumped to conclusions too early, it doesn't even say anything about overall growth. Portable browsers is a specific niche and 2 of the biggest players in regular web browser area don't compete here (IE and Safari). Users of these browsers have to either give up portable use of switch to something else, but only for portable usage. Many if those people won't use the portable browser of their choice on their PCs, so dynamics that include them don't reflect overall situation well.
- Andrew Lee
- Posts: 3063
- Joined: Sat Feb 04, 2006 9:19 am
- Contact:
Re: Update to popularity score algorithm
But isn't this the purpose of the change, to make the list more dynamic? The reason why this change was proposed was because some of you mentioned that the most popular list is almost static due to the accumulated scores.The change will be more radical than I thought. (Not sure if it's a good or bad thing.) Maybe 30 days is a too short time to measure popularity.
All things being equal, the size of the window should be directly correlated with how dynamic the list is. The small the window size, the quicker the list should change, in theory.
Re: Update to popularity score algorithm
Exactly, but the list based on new scores might be too dynamic, placing applications in quite random order.Andrew Lee wrote:But isn't this the purpose of the change, to make the list more dynamic? The reason why this change was proposed was because some of you mentioned that the most popular list is almost static due to the accumulated scores.The change will be more radical than I thought. (Not sure if it's a good or bad thing.) Maybe 30 days is a too short time to measure popularity.
My YouTube channel | Release date of my 13th playlist: August 24, 2020
- Andrew Lee
- Posts: 3063
- Joined: Sat Feb 04, 2006 9:19 am
- Contact:
Re: Update to popularity score algorithm
Random??!! Hardly. Here are the scores for today.Exactly, but the list based on new scores might be too dynamic, placing applications in quite random order.
Typhoon 2001 => 13705
VirtuaWin => 12774
TrueCrypt => 11367
Opera => 11178
XnView => 9511
Converber => 9099
FastStone Image Viewer => 8997
Portable Start Menu => 8370
freeCommander => 8106
KeePass => 7728
When in operation, the list should still be mostly static until an app (old or new) suddenly becomes more active for whatever reason. The new system will simply give this app a chance to appear in the top list. Under the previous system, the newly active app will not stand a chance at all.
Re: Update to popularity score algorithm
Well, I refuse to believe that e.g. Typhoon 2001 could stay the most popular application even for few weeks. I see that it has become more popular within the latest 30 days, but... why? It was not updated or even mentioned in the forum in the meantime.Andrew Lee wrote:Random??!! Hardly. Here are the scores for today.Exactly, but the list based on new scores might be too dynamic, placing applications in quite random order.
Typhoon 2001 => 13705
VirtuaWin => 12774
TrueCrypt => 11367
Opera => 11178
XnView => 9511
Converber => 9099
FastStone Image Viewer => 8997
Portable Start Menu => 8370
freeCommander => 8106
KeePass => 7728
When in operation, the list should still be mostly static until an app (old or new) suddenly becomes more active for whatever reason. The new system will simply give this app a chance to appear in the top list. Under the previous system, the newly active app will not stand a chance at all.
Do you get what I mean? A reason independent of TPFC can raise an application to the first place!
![Shocked :shock:](./images/smilies/icon_eek.gif)
Finally, let me repeat that IMO this rapidly changing scores might actually be good. It depends on what the popularity scores are designed to measure in the first place.
My YouTube channel | Release date of my 13th playlist: August 24, 2020
Re: Update to popularity score algorithm
I think current solution cannot work fine, because remove popularity history is not a good solution at all (in my opinion).. I searched for a better solution and I found a couple of interesting articles:
http://www.evanmiller.org/how-not-to-so ... ating.html
http://blog.linkibol.com/2010/05/07/how ... -proud-of/
First of all, they explain why easy solutions like the following don't work fine:
1. the bayesian average formula, eventually adapted to the needs
2. the Lower bound of Wilson score confidence interval for a Bernoulli parameter
I think the second one could be used for PFC database.. and I think the two different ratings (non-registered and registered) may be unified in a unique one (giving for example a *10 to registered user votes)..
Another solution could be to create a modified bayesian average formula, including: non-registered votes, registered votes, download counter, etc.
http://www.evanmiller.org/how-not-to-so ... ating.html
http://blog.linkibol.com/2010/05/07/how ... -proud-of/
First of all, they explain why easy solutions like the following don't work fine:
The two best solutions seem to be:score = positive votes - negative votes
or
score = positive votes / total votes
1. the bayesian average formula, eventually adapted to the needs
2. the Lower bound of Wilson score confidence interval for a Bernoulli parameter
I think the second one could be used for PFC database.. and I think the two different ratings (non-registered and registered) may be unified in a unique one (giving for example a *10 to registered user votes)..
Another solution could be to create a modified bayesian average formula, including: non-registered votes, registered votes, download counter, etc.
- Andrew Lee
- Posts: 3063
- Joined: Sat Feb 04, 2006 9:19 am
- Contact:
Re: Update to popularity score algorithm
Thanks for the links! I read the two pages over the weekend but have not totally digested them.
I will keep working on them and update the rather simple formula used here once I can totally understand the formula.
I will keep working on them and update the rather simple formula used here once I can totally understand the formula.
Re: Update to popularity score algorithm
I'm studying them too and trying to write a bayesian adapted formula.. we could discuss the implementation if you want.. I'll post the formula soon..
Re: Update to popularity score algorithm
I wrote a script to better understand the formula and to test it:
http://www.lupopensuite.com/files/score.au3
Obviously in AutoIt![Mr. Green :mrgreen:](./images/smilies/icon_mrgreen.gif)
At the beginning you can see also a description of each term of the formula..
I'm still not fully sure that it is correct, but the example result seems good..
It returns the list of software ratings as: + votes, - votes, % popularity
Test results:
![Image](http://www.lupopensuite.com/files/score.png)
An external revision is welcome
..I'm going to integrate also support to registered-users rating (I think a unified score could be very good), we need only to decide the weight of registered-user votes..
http://www.lupopensuite.com/files/score.au3
Obviously in AutoIt
![Mr. Green :mrgreen:](./images/smilies/icon_mrgreen.gif)
At the beginning you can see also a description of each term of the formula..
I'm still not fully sure that it is correct, but the example result seems good..
It returns the list of software ratings as: + votes, - votes, % popularity
Test results:
![Image](http://www.lupopensuite.com/files/score.png)
An external revision is welcome
![Wink :wink:](./images/smilies/icon_wink.gif)
Re: Update to popularity score algorithm
Why 100+ 100- has lower popularity than 10- 10-?
IMO it should work the other way...
IMO it should work the other way...