RentNoGirlfriend said: Lucky them.JaniSIr said: This is not to criticize anyone, but perhaps the reason why scores between 1 and 5 aren't that useful is because people tend to like most of the stuff they watch, so their ratings are more sensitive within the positive side of the spectrum.I kind of don't need 5 values for stuff I dropped after an episode or two. The first time I started watching anime I ran into so much garbage, I dropped the entire medium for 5 years, until I ran out of anything western. |
 |
| What do you mean only 5 for bad? MAL has clearly given 4 for bad. As for me, I use: 1-3 : Bad 4-6: Average 7-10 : Good |
 |
JaniSIr said: N2OBLUe said: The words actually make is worse, because the closest integer to the actual site wide average is 7, and not 5.i think the number rating system couldn’t get better it’s simple and efficient there’s even words to help if you’re confused what you should rate something (exp: great good average ect) idk the complaining about the rating system what more so people want Like sure, a numbering system is simple, and it does not need to be perfect anyway, but it still annoys me more than it should. why is 7 the average scale and not 5? It doesn’t make sense since we scale is on 10 and 5 is half of 10 which makes it the most average scale it is also the same rating is found in school marks, i went to an elementary school that rated marks by numbers from 1 to 10, 10 being the best mark and 5 being the average one, 7 meant that it was good enough too. I still don’t get what’s bothersome about that tbh also i edited my original comment to make it more understandable |
bam |
N2OBLUe said: JaniSIr said: The words actually make is worse, because the closest integer to the actual site wide average is 7, and not 5. Like sure, a numbering system is simple, and it does not need to be perfect anyway, but it still annoys me more than it should. why is 7 the average scale and not 5? It doesn’t make sense since we scale is on 10 and 5 is half of 10 which makes it the most average scale it is also the same rating is found in school marks, i went to an elementary school that rated marks by numbers from 1 to 10, 10 being the best mark and 5 being the average one, 7 meant that it was good enough too. I still don’t get what’s bothersome about that tbh also i edited my original comment to make it more understandable they should change 5 from "average" to mediocre. |
 |
| My starting assumption is this: were one able to rate every single anime in existence and the scores were to follow a normal distribution, then the average of the scores would be 5.5. 6~10 are greater than 5.5, having a 'positive' value; 1~5 are smaller than 5.5, thus being 'negative'. Following this assumption, my rating system is thus: 6~10 = differing levels of 'good/above average', 1~5 = differing levels of 'bad/below average'. Everything else I've written on my profile is fluff that helps me differentiate between said scores. At least, this is how I do it. I'll admit that the wording of my own score criteria skews my scale towards the lower end, just because getting 10/10 happens once in a blue moon. Oh well, whatever makes sense to me. JaniSIr said: I kind of don't need 5 values for stuff I dropped after an episode or two. Whereas I actually found some good stuff recently, so it's getting a bit crowded up there. In essence I try to treat the opposites of the spectrum like each other, in terms of scarcity and the amount of positive/negative impressions I bear against them. For instance, I have approximately the same amount of hate for a 2 that I have for the love for a 9. So it helps that there are multiple values for me. Maybe should just inflate my scores, use 10 and 9 more liberally, so that I don't hurt the average of the shows I did like too much... Or just stop caring, but that's easier said than done. All my scores exist to help me clarify my own preferences, and I couldn't care less whether my placing some shows lower than others 'hurt the scores' or not. |
BurningCarnationMay 19, 2022 8:14 AM
| 1 - 4 How much I dislike the anime 5 - I'm indifferent 6 - 9 how much I liked it 10 - When I felt something was truly special. Many of my favorite anime aren't 10s |
 |
| Only 10? That is already too much... |
  |
| The obvious first answer is stop caring about the site wide averages. Just because the global average for series is between 6-7 doesn't mean you can't use 5 as an average. There's literally nothing stopping a person from suddenly deciding like 3 is their dedicated average score or deciding they only want to use every other number. Unless you intentionally watch shows you know you'll hate the score will almost always have a higher distribution towards the upper end of whatever scale you use. |
| I kind of like the idea of having .5 to the system but then it might just become a little too much. So usually if I'm torn between if I want to score it 7 or 8 or any two numbers, I usually see how the average score and if the score it lower than how I feel it deserves I'll score higher and vice versa if I feel it's higher than it deserves (not that my score will make too much of a difference anyway). I won't do this for 9 and 10 indecisiveness though since I usually know for sure if it's a masterpiece to me or not quite there but great enough. I don't think there's 5 for bad. More like 4 since there's not a 0 score and 7 is still considered good, so 1 for masterpiece, 3 for good, 2 for average, 3 for bad and 1 for the worst ever to the point you had to drop it midway or forced yourself to watch but wish it didn't exist. |
epidemia78 said: N2OBLUe said: why is 7 the average scale and not 5? It doesn’t make sense since we scale is on 10 and 5 is half of 10 which makes it the most average scale it is also the same rating is found in school marks, i went to an elementary school that rated marks by numbers from 1 to 10, 10 being the best mark and 5 being the average one, 7 meant that it was good enough too. I still don’t get what’s bothersome about that tbh also i edited my original comment to make it more understandable they should change 5 from "average" to mediocre. they hold similar meanings but that can help distinguish rating better then* ig why not? even tho the number 5 is still the same but my question is how is it that bothersome? |
N2O_May 19, 2022 8:59 AM
bam |
| 10 options are more than enough for me. Whenever I think an integer number isn't quite right, I just round down (floor) the fractional number I have in my head. That does the trick. |
 |
| I don't mind the 1-10 rating system, although I personally prefer to use a 0-10 rating system. That way, you can have five varying "good" scores (6-10), five varying "bad" scores (0-4) and one completely neutral score for something that's neither good nor bad (5). |
Formerly known as Kuroni_Kuru |
N2OBLUe said: JaniSIr said: The words actually make is worse, because the closest integer to the actual site wide average is 7, and not 5. Like sure, a numbering system is simple, and it does not need to be perfect anyway, but it still annoys me more than it should. why is 7 the average scale and not 5? It doesn’t make sense since we scale is on 10 and 5 is half of 10 which makes it the most average scale it is also the same rating is found in school marks, i went to an elementary school that rated marks by numbers from 1 to 10, 10 being the best mark and 5 being the average one, 7 meant that it was good enough too. I still don’t get what’s bothersome about that tbh also i edited my original comment to make it more understandable Because 5 being the average is the theory (also since there is no 0, it should be 5.5...) and here is the reality: https://anime.plus/s/globals The site wide global average is 6.54, which is closes to 7. And most of the low rated shows are obscure OVAs that nobody watched, unless they watched it because they are infamously bad. I once started looking though all the shows below 4, and I think the only long one was Ex Arm. So assuming you can stomach all the garbage, you could legit watch all of them in one sitting. |
|
| maybe its because i havent watched that much anime but even a 1-5 system would be enough for me. |
 |
JaniSIr said: according to the statistics 7 is the average rating of a show not that the shows rated 7 are average, it means that there are a lot of shows rated 7 compared to the other ones that are rated another numberN2OBLUe said: why is 7 the average scale and not 5? It doesn’t make sense since we scale is on 10 and 5 is half of 10 which makes it the most average scale it is also the same rating is found in school marks, i went to an elementary school that rated marks by numbers from 1 to 10, 10 being the best mark and 5 being the average one, 7 meant that it was good enough too. I still don’t get what’s bothersome about that tbh also i edited my original comment to make it more understandable Because 5 being the average is the theory (also since there is no 0, it should be 5.5...) and here is the reality: https://anime.plus/s/globals The site wide global average is 6.54, which is closes to 7. And most of the low rated shows are obscure OVAs that nobody watched, unless they watched it because they are infamously bad. I once started looking though all the shows below 4, and I think the only long one was Ex Arm. So assuming you can stomach all the garbage, you could legit watch all of them in one sitting. also i think low rated shows are rated low because they are simply bad to other people? 4-1 are good numbers to determine the scale of what bad is, but sometimes ratings are rigged or biased so i think in the end people shouldn’t worry too much if a show is rated a 6 and avoid because it can turn out to be a great anime |
bam |
| Sounds like you want decimal values, but its important to remember that it doesnt fkin matter. whether something is 6 vs a 6.2 or 6.5 - just round it up or down and move on. I am also never sure if anyone on MAL understands how fractions work. Some people act like 12/20 is different from 6/10. |
| https://combosmooth.itch.io/ - I make free-to-play browser games for PC and I sell pixel art animation here |
BurningCarnation said: My starting assumption is this: were one able to rate every single anime in existence and the scores were to follow a normal distribution, then the average of the scores would be 5.5. That assumption didn't ever make a whole lot of sense to me. I mean I understand expecting a normal distribution for something that is totally random like throwing a dice, where each side has an equal likelihood of showing up - but ratings aren't random. They are dependent on the quality of the show. And there is no indication that the quality is random either. There is a good to fair chance that there are more good than bad shows in existence and that would lead to the statistical average being higher than 5.5. And we have to keep in mind that is all there is to a statistical average. You take the data points you got and determine where it lands based on that. There is nothing that says it has to land on the median of the scale (5.5 in this case). That's why I am always baffled by people who try to match their rating so that their avarage lands on or near 5. It's basically a perversion of statistics and the scientific method. Trying to match the data so that it fits the hypothesis instead of adjusting ones hypothesis based on ones findings from the data. And it's especially funny if you consider that in public discourse that's usually what the public blasts bad statisticians for. Forging data to fit their narrative. |
 |
Asturaetus said: BurningCarnation said: My starting assumption is this: were one able to rate every single anime in existence and the scores were to follow a normal distribution, then the average of the scores would be 5.5. That assumption didn't ever make a whole lot of sense to me. I mean I understand expecting a normal distribution for something that is totally random like throwing a dice, where each side has an equal likelihood of showing up - but ratings aren't random. They are dependent on the quality of the show. And there is no indication that the quality is random either. There is a good to fair chance that there are more good than bad shows in existence and that would lead to the statistical average being higher than 5.5. And we have to keep in mind that is all there is to a statistical average. You take the data points you got and determine where it lands based on that. There is nothing that says it has to land on the median of the scale (5.5 in this case). That's why I am always baffled by people who try to match their rating so that their avarage lands on or near 5. It's basically a perversion of statistics and the scientific method. Trying to match the data so that it fits the hypothesis instead of adjusting ones hypothesis based on ones findings from the data. And it's especially funny if you consider that in public discourse that's usually what the public blasts bad statisticians for. Forging data to fit their narrative. Anime rating isn't an objective scale, and it's not even an absolute scale but relative compared to the other shows. So arguably changing scores after the fact is to improve the accuracy of the measurements, having acquired more reference points. And we fudging our own scores also further proves that statistics is problematic, so we are doubly right! Also the hypothesis is that 90% of everything is trash, and most people only try to watch stuff they might enjoy, which should inevitably not work out on the long run. |
|
JaniSIr said: Anime rating isn't an objective scale, and it's not even an absolute scale but relative compared to the other shows. I can't say I can completely agree with that. Sure - you can compare stuff and set it to a relation to one another - up to a point. But a show that's good won't suddenly become bad and loose the qualities that made it good just because there are more shows which also happened to be good. That wouldn't make any sense. |
|
zombie_pegasus said: I deal with it by actually using all of them instead of rating on a 5 point scale. 10 numbers is actually enough. My scoring is a bell curve based around 5. 1 is an outlier.  I would expect one's rating to be positvely skewed if they used any sort of heuristic before deciding to watch a show. Do you literally just watch random anime? |
<Insert clever quote> |
Asturaetus said: That assumption didn't ever make a whole lot of sense to me. I mean I understand expecting a normal distribution for something that is totally random like throwing a dice, where each side has an equal likelihood of showing up - but ratings aren't random. They are dependent on the quality of the show. And there is no indication that the quality is random either. I mean, I did say it was under the assumption that one were to watch every anime--which is already impossible, and thus by virtue of being unable to fulfill that premise, several biases will appear within anyone's rating system. And as you noted, quality isn't necessarily random, though trying to 'judge quality' is opening a whole can of worms by itself. There is a good to fair chance that there are more good than bad shows in existence and that would lead to the statistical average being higher than 5.5. On the contrary, one could easily argue that there are more bad shows than good ones, which would bring the shows' average lower than 5.5. This is what I believe, and it shows in my own average. And we have to keep in mind that is all there is to a statistical average. You take the data points you got and determine where it lands based on that. There is nothing that says it has to land on the median of the scale (5.5 in this case). That's why I am always baffled by people who try to match their rating so that their avarage lands on or near 5. It's basically a perversion of statistics and the scientific method. Trying to match the data so that it fits the hypothesis instead of adjusting ones hypothesis based on ones findings from the data. And it's especially funny if you consider that in public discourse that's usually what the public blasts bad statisticians for. Forging data to fit their narrative. 'Average' is already a lofty concept, especially since we're trying to determine the artistic quality of something. What does 'good', 'bad', and 'average' mean to me? Determining what's average and what's below/above average is already far too subjective; combined with the fact that one can never truly consume every single piece of available media, I'd say it's pretty arrogant for anyone to say that their own list is 'objective' or 'perfectly scientific'--and that's certainly not the case for mine. What I assume as 'average' might be serviceable for others or even great, or just pure bollocks. I already admitted that I think there's more bad than good, which is a huge assumption by itself. In the end, what matters to me the most in my ratings is that it's intuitive--it 'makes sense' to me. If I can look at all my 5/10s and then say, "yh that works," then that's good enough for me. So although I do start with the '5.5 average' thingy, it ultimately doesn't bother me too much how much I stray from that 'perfect average'. I'll never be able to watch everything, and I'll never have enough time or headspace to properly compare everything, whether in a vacuum or relatively--so as long as the current system works for me, then that's just fine. I'm not going to try and make my average a 5.5, because it's pointless. Perhaps the better way would be to say that if everyone could theoretically watch every anime in the world, then the normal distribution would result in the average being 5.5. However, since I am neither everyone nor am able to watch everything, my personal biases will inevitably show in both my average and my rating system, and to deny it would be unscientific, arrogant, and dishonest. I hope my rambling made some sense. |
BurningCarnationMay 20, 2022 9:17 AM
BurningCarnation said: On the contrary, one could easily argue that there are more bad shows than good ones, which would bring the shows' average lower than 5.5. This is what I believe, and it shows in my own average. Exactly my point. I am not arguing that it hast to be one way or the other. Can be more bad, can be more good. It's just this assumption that it has to be a normal distribution that I kinda took issue and that I see as flawed to begin with. And I mainly took issue with it because it's sadly the basis of an argument that is all too common around MAL. You see the people time and again - bemoaning that the sites average rating tends more toward 7 like it's somehow a bad thing and that it ought to be 5 - when there is no basis for it - at least not in statistics. What you/or anyone does with their list - that doesn't really bother me the least. Some invent their own rating scales, sometimes that can be quite a curious thing, but to each their own. Personally I do it quite similarly - and go by enjoyment, what feels right and judge the title mainly by its own merit. I also don't see much use in going over my ratings again and changing them because I know - how much I enjoy a show is quite dependant on what mood I was in and my expectations at the time. And that can change at the drop of a hat. So I treat every rating as a "snapshot in time". So yeah - you made sense and I hope you can understand where I am coming from. |
AsturaetusMay 20, 2022 9:27 AM
|
| Not an issue. I have an AL account but I still prefer the 10 system over the alternatives that site has, and I don't bother with decimals either. Writing your own rating system might help you understand better what those numbers mean to you, and make you less indecisive about your ratings. |
Asturaetus said: Exactly my point. I am not arguing that it hast to be one way or the other. Can be more bad, can be more good. It's just this assumption that it has to be a normal distribution that I kinda took issue and that I see as flawed to begin with. Considering the huge amount of shows and the huge amount of people watching said shows, it's safe to assume that the rating would somewhat follow a curve similar to a normal distribution. Of course, that doesn't have to be the case, and rarely is--real life seldom follows 'theoretically' 'ideal' mathematical models down to minute details. Hell, MAL's stats show that just by itself. Which leads to... And I mainly took issue with it because it's sadly the basis of an argument that is all too common around MAL. You see the people time and again - bemoaning that the sites average rating tends more toward 7 like it's somehow a bad thing and that it ought to be 5 - when there is no basis for it - at least not in statistics. Most people aren't as into anime as some people on MAL are, and will not watch shows outside their niche/preference. Some will actively avoid such shows, which unsurprisingly leads to higher scores all around. For an individual this wouldn't mean much, but when such a phenomenon pervades among several millions of people it becomes a meaningful stat. If everyone that also hated anime were on this site and contributed to the scores, maybe that'd be different, but that'll never be the case. Anyway, I'm pretty sure that online scores in general, regardless of medium, would be skewed towards the positive more than the negative, be it, for example, IMDB, Rotten Tomatoes, Metacritic, or even Amazon reviews, if we were to take every piece of information in the sites. If anything, I'm the outlier, not them. In any case, I'm personally annoyed with both sides of the mean score bickering, and just wish everyone would shut up about them--both the 'high mean scores mean you're not rating the right way arrrgh' and 'low mean scores mean you hate anime, stop watching arrrgh' camps. Personally I do it quite similarly - and go by enjoyment, what feels right and judge the title mainly by its own merit. I also don't see much use in going over my ratings again and changing them because I know - how much I enjoy a show is quite dependant on what mood I was in and my expectations at the time. And that can change at the drop of a hat. So I treat every rating as a "snapshot in time". So yeah - you made sense and I hope you can understand where I am coming from. Definitely. As you said, what rating one gave to a show is in itself capricious and arbitrary, and can change whenever one wants, and of course over time as well--the only way to get a comprehensive viewpoint of what someone thinks about a show is to talk to them about it. |
BurningCarnationMay 20, 2022 10:23 AM
Asturaetus said: JaniSIr said: Anime rating isn't an objective scale, and it's not even an absolute scale but relative compared to the other shows. I can't say I can completely agree with that. Sure - you can compare stuff and set it to a relation to one another - up to a point. But a show that's good won't suddenly become bad and loose the qualities that made it good just because there are more shows which also happened to be good. That wouldn't make any sense. It won't lose qualities. The reference however changes. And your taste may also... Plus I actually wanted to improve the rating of many shows, like my 7-8 section is getting crowded, because some shows I remember fondly despite the numerous flaws are in 8, and it's hard to give others an 8, even though when they are better than 7s, because they are worse than those 8s I watched long ago... |
|
| I consider them as if they were school grades, so everything below 5 is "really bad" and everything above 5 "approves." It doesn't matter if it were by a bit or by a lot. There's a detailed rating system in my profile, but in summary, I set them like this: 10-9 ～ Loved it. 8-7 ～ Liked it. 6 ～ No opinion. 5 ～ Disliked it. 4-1 ～ Hated it. |
 
|
| easy I don't character limit is still stupid |
  |
xLoop said: I actually often watch bad anime on purpose, because they're shorter. You can watch 20 bad anime in an hour, you can't do that with good anime. For TV series my mean score is 5.8, and even that is dragged down by TV shorts.zombie_pegasus said: I deal with it by actually using all of them instead of rating on a 5 point scale. 10 numbers is actually enough. My scoring is a bell curve based around 5. 1 is an outlier. I would expect one's rating to be positvely skewed if they used any sort of heuristic before deciding to watch a show. Do you literally just watch random anime? I've padded my list with music videos before, indiscriminately. I'd literally just go through all of the music videos MAL lists and watch them all and rate them as I saw was fair so that leads to having a lot of low scores. With TV series I still fairly judge them all, so even if I enjoyed watching something, if it was plain I'll give it a 6. I rate far more harshly than most people would. I've seen someone who used 7/10 to mean "this gave me pancreatic cancer and I wouldn't recommend it to my worst enemy". |
  |
| I have similar issues. I don't like to put 9s and 10s so easily, so 8/10 is like a confort zone for great anime with some defects. Don't think so much about the scores and calculate it based on the amount of defects and their impact in the plot if you want. |
 |
| how I deal with it? well I use Anilist, that's how. |
| "We could make the world better, but it's easier to just shut our eyes." ~Blackwall |
| Since MAL doesn't have a 5.5 style, I've been trying to push more titles below to make my list more sensible, but, in many cases, I didn't really want to. I'm quite generous with my scores and I don't think the word "appalling" ever came to my mind while watching anything, even though it's a word I know. Maybe I just like anime too much. Or maybe I'm just too numb to bad stuff and I'm not a particularly passionate person in first place. But partially, I think it's due to the way MAL names scores. It should be at most an instructive "1 means horrible, 5 means passable, 10 means masterpiece" and leave the rest for the user to decide. Edit: or not name the scores at all. That would be even better. MizuDLuffy said: just stop caring, either score everything a 10 or don't score at all. Chad profile. |
| This post is all kinds of contradictory... but anyway, I just use the rating scale as accurately as possible, nothing else to be done about it. |
| If you reply back to me and I never respond, I lost interest and don't care. Sorry about that. |
| I don't have any problem with the system. |
| "The name's Gambit. Remember it." -Gambit "X-Men '97"  |
| technically MAL just needs 3 scores. 1 = bad 2 = average 3 = good anything more is bloat |
 ☆☆☆ "There's a huge difference between one and infinity. However, compared to the difference between existence and non-existence, one and infinite are nearly the same. I am the child destined to become the best witch... no... The greatest Creator in the world...!" -Maria Ushiromiya ☆☆☆ |
| I use 2-10 to differentiate everything I liked to some degree and forget at all about bothering differentiating everything I didn't, using only one score (1) to all of the latter. |
| You could solve it by using S-A-B-C-D-E-F scale instead of numbers, but that could make the score calculation and ratings harder. So I leave my scale like this 10 S+ 9 S 8 A 7 B 6 C 5 D 4 E 3 and below F |
| MOKUSHI KUSHIMO SHIMOKU KUMOSHI MOSHIKU SHIKUMO. |
| Having decimal scores would be a fucking pain in the ass so whole numbers are already fine |
Yui727 said: As long as you can type it in it's cool.Having decimal scores would be a fucking pain in the ass so whole numbers are already fine Having double precision floating point values with a drop down list would be horrible. |
|
| I use it like this: 10 - perfect 9-8 - very good 7-6 - good 5 - average 4 - slightly below average 3-1 - bad |
   sos, there's a goddess in disquise |
| I don't use the entire rating scale because I find giving a single 10 impossible, every piece of entertainment has a flaw and despite I love something so much, that something is not a masterpiece. 8-9 are my favorites.10 numbers is enough for everyone. Furthermore, I find giving high scores too difficult. |
 |
JaniSIr said: I don't get the rationale. 10 scores means 10 bins. Anything between 9-10 gets a 10 score, and so on. The cut offs could be anything you'd like. For me, anything between 9.3-10 gets a 10. But after complaining about not enough bins, you are entertaining biasing the scores to increase the average? Maybe you should just rebin them so that 8.5-10 gets a 10, although that would be kind of liberal.Maybe should just inflate my scores, use 10 and 9 more liberally, so that I don't hurt the average of the shows I did like too much... Or just stop caring, but that's easier said than done. And I don't understand the idea of the arbitrary "good, average, and bad" binning. Assuming there's no quantization, then the scores would be continuous. There would be no specific cut off between good and average. So it's meaningless to me to say that there are 3 scores for good and 2 for average or whatever. That makes it sound as if you wanted less bins and not more. |
| My subjective reviews: katsureview.wordpress.com THE CHAT CLUB. |
| it needs five-digit scale. How else am I going to signify that Jojo part 3 part 2 is actually 99.991 while jojo part 3 part 1 is 99.989? |
| its fine for me. I kind of wish you could do decimal places like aniilist, but it's not that big of a deal. I always put a normal anime I think that was enjoyable with flaws at 7, an okay-decent anime at 6, and anything below it being generic to bad. An 8 would be really good with some flaws, a 9 would be for anime that are amazing, and 10s are reserved for personal favorites. |
| I don't care about numbers. I care about how much I enjoyed it. |
KuroNekoAlchemy said: it needs five-digit scale. How else am I going to signify that Jojo part 3 part 2 is actually 99.991 while jojo part 3 part 1 is 99.989? double precision floating point is the bare minimum. katsucats said: JaniSIr said: I don't get the rationale. 10 scores means 10 bins. Anything between 9-10 gets a 10 score, and so on. The cut offs could be anything you'd like. For me, anything between 9.3-10 gets a 10. But after complaining about not enough bins, you are entertaining biasing the scores to increase the average? Maybe you should just rebin them so that 8.5-10 gets a 10, although that would be kind of liberal.Maybe should just inflate my scores, use 10 and 9 more liberally, so that I don't hurt the average of the shows I did like too much... Or just stop caring, but that's easier said than done. And I don't understand the idea of the arbitrary "good, average, and bad" binning. Assuming there's no quantization, then the scores would be continuous. There would be no specific cut off between good and average. So it's meaningless to me to say that there are 3 scores for good and 2 for average or whatever. That makes it sound as if you wanted less bins and not more. Let's say that "anime enjoyment" is a quantified real value with Gaussian distribution. That real value needs to be mapped to 10 quantized values, which is like not even 4 bits. One solution would be picking the best and worst anime ever, and assigning those to 1 and 10 and linearly mapping everything in-between. But if I lets say enjoyed Violet Evergarden Graham's number much, which is totally valid on a Gaussian curve, then everything else will be mapped to 1, so that's not a good bit depth. On the other hand sacrificing precision on the outliers would allow more bits on the many average shows, where deciding whether they are worth watching or not is an important question, whereas "mind blown x 1000" vs "mind blown x 1001" kind of doesn't matter. The "bad average good" thing is binning for bins, not shows. |
|
| Q. So how do you deal with MAL only having 10 quantized values for score? A. jus pick |
 |
More topics from this board
» Has anime ruined your perception of 3D Girls?Dragevard - 23 minutes ago |
3 |
by tchitchouan
»»
8 minutes ago |
|
» Would anime be better if they started to use more adult casts?Thy-Veseveia - Jun 5 |
43 |
by LoveYourSmile
»»
10 minutes ago |
|
» Anime peaked in 1998Iron_Leopard - Yesterday |
47 |
by SpiderMiles3523
»»
14 minutes ago |
|
» What is good animation?LenRea - May 24 |
28 |
by Amoh25
»»
21 minutes ago |
|
» Saddest Anime Character DeathsHenrique-Senpai - Yesterday |
12 |
by TheBlockernator
»»
23 minutes ago |