Subject:
|
Re: Top-N article list adjusted for article-age
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.general
|
Date:
|
Fri, 7 Apr 2000 13:39:57 GMT
|
Highlighted:
|
(details)
|
Viewed:
|
786 times
|
| |
|
|
Todd Lehman wrote:
>
> In lugnet.admin.general, Todd Lehman writes:
> > [...] The elapsed time (article age) will be accounted for later in
> > searches and top-N lists by scaling the score according to some f(t). [...]
>
> Here's a crude example -- a static list built "by hand" from a few one-liners
> using current data:
>
> http://www.lugnet.com/?p=hotlight
>
> I told it to examine all the articles which have been rated so far, and
> adjust their ratings downward the older the article, according to this
> formula:
>
> r' = r / (1 + t)
>
> where r is the article's current rating, r' is the adjusted rating, and t is
> the elapsed time (article's age) in weeks, yielding a smooth hyperbolic curve.
>
> Thus, a brand-new article which has just appeared has its rating divided by 1
> (no change). An article 1 hour old is has its rating divided by 1.006. An
> article 1 day old has its rating divided by 1.1429. An article 3 days old has
> its rating divided by 1.4286. An article 7 days old has its rating divided
> by 2. etc., etc.
>
> A more concrete example: the first article currently shown at the URL above
> (if you're reading this way in the future from now, it might not match what
> you read here!) currently has a rating of 83.3333 and was approximately 10
> hours and 45 minutes (or approximately 0.06408 weeks) old at the time the
> list was generated. Thus it had its rating divided by approximately 1.06408,
> giving an age-adjusted rating of 78.2834.
>
> The list shows all articles in the system with an age-adjusted rating of 60
> or higher.
>
> But it's just a test, and it's past my bedtime. The purpose of this test
> was to see how closely the numbers might come to a "what's hot" list by
> applying a simple age formula.
that's pretty cool - what would be interesting is to see what articles
were _missed_. Also, I started thinking about the default rating...
Say, something posted to .announce should probably be rated higher by
default than, say, something posted to a .loc group. But that leads
really fast to the customized per-group default ratings, where each user
can choose which groups are important to him.
However, if each user had his own customized spotlight page, it could
not be used as a common reference anymore... Which is a bad thing, I
think.
Thoughts?
:)
Dan
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Top-N article list adjusted for article-age
|
| (...) Here's a crude example -- a static list built "by hand" from a few one-liners using current data: (URL) told it to examine all the articles which have been rated so far, and adjust their ratings downward the older the article, according to (...) (25 years ago, 7-Apr-00, to lugnet.admin.general) !
|
24 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
