Subject:
|
Re: Lego Purity
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.general
|
Date:
|
Fri, 28 Sep 2007 00:58:04 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
5061 times
|
| |
|
|
--snip--
> Looks like what I *ought* to be doing (cuz I agree with you that you shouldn't
> be a flat-out 0) is making it more of an asymptotic curve towards the extremes,
> rather than linear progression, hence keeping the wider range for the normal
> person, but making the extremes of 10 and 0 be far less likely. Hm. I'll see
> what I can do...
Youy could try something like 1/2[1-tanh(k(std-30))] so that it smoothly
approaches zero.
> DaveE
Tim
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Lego Purity
|
| (...) lol Is there a contest running (which I'm not aware of) that consist in quoting in Lugnet the most complex math. function? :-) Didier "7.83" Enjary (...) (17 years ago, 28-Sep-07, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Lego Purity
|
| (...) Ahh, ok, I see what you mean. Yeah, this part is difficult. In my scoring mechanism, I was trying to predict what the most likely deviation from the mean would be, but I didn't have any data at the time. Under the covers, the way it scores you (...) (17 years ago, 26-Sep-07, to lugnet.general)
|
43 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
