|
|
|
 We can help FIRST improve the system, but we can't just blame them and wait. - Siri [more] |
 |
|
|||||||
|
||||||||
 |
| Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
|
|
|
| We can help FIRST improve the system, but we can't just blame them and wait. - Siri [more] |
|
|
|||||||
|
||||||||
|
| Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
|
2013 Qual Schedule Analysis
All 81 Qual Schedules for 2013 (Weeks 1 thru 7 Regionals & Districts, plus MAR, MSC, Archimedes, Curie, Galileo, & Newton) are summarized in individual CSV files (which can be opened directly in Excel if file association is set). For each event, a matrix shows which teams each team played With and Against. FWIW, this shows anomalies in the scheduling algorithm where oftentimes a team will play with or against another team more than once, while not playing with or against dozens of other teams in the event. http://www.chiefdelphi.com/media/papers/2822 
|
|
#2
29-04-2013, 14:31
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: 2013 Qual Schedule Analysis
I noticed this at Northern Lights. There were a many teams we had two matches with (both with and against). But there were 5 teams we never played with or against, which was quite odd to me given there were only 48 teams and 10 qualification matches.
|
|
#3
29-04-2013, 16:23
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: 2013 Qual Schedule Analysis
A few points.
There is a description of an early version of the scheduling software on the Idle Loop website. The FMS may use a more recent version but let's assume the algorithm is the same. The scheduling algorithm is stochastic, i.e. it has a random element to it, which is a standard approach for solving a complex optimization problem. The particular criterion discussed above is "Pairing Uniformity" and it is one of the goals being optimized, but that has to be balanced against several other criteria including computation time. Since the algorithm is stochastic, the "good schedule" metric isn't really do the same teams play with/against each other more than once but rather does this happen much more frequently than we expect. Smaller events such as Western Canada or Toronto East have few enough teams that it's a mathematical necessity that the same teams face each other more than once. Finally, most Regionals have 1-5 teams who play an additional surrogate match. If the purpose of this analysis is to see how it affects ranking then a team's surrogate match should really be excluded, although they would still count as a partner or alliance for other teams. (This is a small effect)
|
|
#4
29-04-2013, 21:44
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 2013 Qual Schedule Analysis
At the Livonia district, we had to go against Team 27 in three of our first four matches during qualifications. We also played with them once in our last match of qualifications. It just seemed that the scheduling algorithm should have prevented something like that from occurring.
|
|
#5
30-04-2013, 12:49
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: 2013 Qual Schedule Analysis
Ok maybe I am just not getting it what is the difference between W and A and what does each number in each mean
EDIT: Wait Senior moment W is With and A is Against? and the numbers are the occurrences Last edited by MARS_James : 30-04-2013 at 12:52.
|
|
#6
01-05-2013, 15:48
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: 2013 Qual Schedule Analysis
I just added a one-page summary of the 162 qual schedule analysis spreadsheets. http://www.chiefdelphi.com/media/papers/2822
|
|
#7
01-05-2013, 16:19
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: 2013 Qual Schedule Analysis
Quote:
|
|
#8
01-05-2013, 16:33
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: 2013 Qual Schedule Analysis
Quote:
That solution will always give the same summary statistics. Last edited by MikeE : 01-05-2013 at 16:41. Reason: Applied some thought!
|
|
#9
01-05-2013, 17:24
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: 2013 Qual Schedule Analysis
Quote:
So I reverse my conclusion.
|
|
#10
01-05-2013, 17:59
|
||||||
|
||||||
|
Re: 2013 Qual Schedule Analysis
It appears that the match scheduler does not care about multiple opponents/partners in surrogate matches. I checked the Archimedes schedule and the teams that had multiple opponents played each other once in their surrogate match and once in a match that counted.
Here is the scheduler's analysis of the Archimedes schedule, which does not show repeats in matches that count. Code:
Schedule Statistics
-------------------
#: number of matches played, a '+' after the number
indicates one additional round as a surrogate
d: minimum delta between matches (e.g. '1' means back-to-back)
part: number of distinct partners followed by most frequent repeat count
opp: number of distinct opponents followed by most frequent repeat count
both: number of distinct teams seen as partner or opponent
followed by most frequent combined repeat count
r/b: balance between red and blue alliance appearances
eg, 3b means team appeared as blue 3 times more than as red
4+ repeats: any teams seen four or more times as partners or opponents
team # d part opp both r/b 4+ repeats
---- -- -- ----- ----- ----- --- ------------
11: 8 11 | 16 1 | 24 1 | 40 1 | 0
20: 8 9 | 16 1 | 24 1 | 40 1 | 0
33: 8 9 | 16 1 | 24 1 | 40 1 | 0
51: 8 8 | 16 1 | 24 1 | 40 1 | 0
71: 8 9 | 16 1 | 24 1 | 40 1 | 2r
78: 8 11 | 16 1 | 24 1 | 40 1 | 0
126: 8 9 | 16 1 | 24 1 | 40 1 | 2r
172: 8 11 | 16 1 | 24 1 | 40 1 | 2r
236: 8 14 | 16 1 | 24 1 | 40 1 | 0
254: 8 8 | 16 1 | 24 1 | 40 1 | 2b
291: 8 9 | 16 1 | 24 1 | 40 1 | 2b
314: 8 11 | 16 1 | 24 1 | 40 1 | 0
316: 8 8 | 16 1 | 24 1 | 40 1 | 0
321: 8 9 | 16 1 | 24 1 | 40 1 | 2r
326: 8 9 | 16 1 | 24 1 | 40 1 | 2b
365: 8 8 | 16 1 | 24 1 | 40 1 | 0
379: 8 10 | 16 1 | 24 1 | 40 1 | 2b
433: 8+ 11 | 16 1 | 24 1 | 40 1 | 0
469: 8 8 | 16 1 | 24 1 | 40 1 | 0
525: 8 11 | 16 1 | 24 1 | 40 1 | 2r
639: 8 9 | 16 1 | 24 1 | 40 1 | 2b
694: 8 14 | 16 1 | 24 1 | 40 1 | 0
701: 8 8 | 16 1 | 24 1 | 40 1 | 2b
801: 8 9 | 16 1 | 24 1 | 40 1 | 2r
812: 8 8 | 16 1 | 24 1 | 40 1 | 0
836: 8 9 | 16 1 | 24 1 | 40 1 | 0
840: 8 9 | 16 1 | 24 1 | 40 1 | 0
846: 8 11 | 16 1 | 24 1 | 40 1 | 2r
868: 8 8 | 16 1 | 24 1 | 40 1 | 2b
910: 8 8 | 16 1 | 24 1 | 40 1 | 2r
930: 8+ 9 | 16 1 | 24 1 | 40 1 | 0
948: 8 8 | 16 1 | 24 1 | 40 1 | 0
955: 8 8 | 16 1 | 24 1 | 40 1 | 0
973: 8 10 | 16 1 | 24 1 | 40 1 | 0
987: 8+ 8 | 16 1 | 24 1 | 40 1 | 0
1011: 8 10 | 16 1 | 24 1 | 40 1 | 0
1071: 8 12 | 16 1 | 24 1 | 40 1 | 0
1075: 8 9 | 16 1 | 24 1 | 40 1 | 2b
1100: 8 8 | 16 1 | 24 1 | 40 1 | 2b
1334: 8 13 | 16 1 | 24 1 | 40 1 | 0
1448: 8 10 | 16 1 | 24 1 | 40 1 | 0
1519: 8 10 | 16 1 | 24 1 | 40 1 | 0
1595: 8 8 | 16 1 | 24 1 | 40 1 | 0
1610: 8 9 | 16 1 | 24 1 | 40 1 | 2b
1660: 8 8 | 16 1 | 24 1 | 40 1 | 2r
1714: 8 9 | 16 1 | 24 1 | 40 1 | 2b
1747: 8 11 | 16 1 | 24 1 | 40 1 | 0
1756: 8 8 | 16 1 | 24 1 | 40 1 | 0
1796: 8 11 | 16 1 | 24 1 | 40 1 | 0
1836: 8 8 | 16 1 | 24 1 | 40 1 | 2b
1868: 8 10 | 16 1 | 24 1 | 40 1 | 2b
1902: 8 8 | 16 1 | 24 1 | 40 1 | 0
1967: 8 8 | 16 1 | 24 1 | 40 1 | 2b
2016: 8 10 | 16 1 | 24 1 | 40 1 | 0
2081: 8 11 | 16 1 | 24 1 | 40 1 | 2r
2137: 8 8 | 16 1 | 24 1 | 40 1 | 0
2165: 8 9 | 16 1 | 24 1 | 40 1 | 0
2408: 8 13 | 16 1 | 24 1 | 40 1 | 0
2415: 8 12 | 16 1 | 24 1 | 40 1 | 0
2457: 8 9 | 16 1 | 24 1 | 40 1 | 0
2468: 8 8 | 16 1 | 24 1 | 40 1 | 2r
2486: 8 9 | 16 1 | 24 1 | 40 1 | 2r
2543: 8 8 | 16 1 | 24 1 | 40 1 | 2r
2590: 8 12 | 16 1 | 24 1 | 40 1 | 0
2604: 8 9 | 16 1 | 24 1 | 40 1 | 0
2614: 8 9 | 16 1 | 24 1 | 40 1 | 0
2704: 8 8 | 16 1 | 24 1 | 40 1 | 0
2705: 8 12 | 16 1 | 24 1 | 40 1 | 0
2709: 8 10 | 16 1 | 24 1 | 40 1 | 0
2959: 8 11 | 16 1 | 24 1 | 40 1 | 2b
3003: 8 9 | 16 1 | 24 1 | 40 1 | 2r
3008: 8 9 | 16 1 | 24 1 | 40 1 | 0
3044: 8+ 8 | 16 1 | 24 1 | 40 1 | 0
3145: 8 14 | 16 1 | 24 1 | 40 1 | 2r
3242: 8 10 | 16 1 | 24 1 | 40 1 | 0
3245: 8 12 | 16 1 | 24 1 | 40 1 | 0
3310: 8 10 | 16 1 | 24 1 | 40 1 | 0
3314: 8 8 | 16 1 | 24 1 | 40 1 | 0
3467: 8 9 | 16 1 | 24 1 | 40 1 | 2b
3478: 8 9 | 16 1 | 24 1 | 40 1 | 0
3504: 8 8 | 16 1 | 24 1 | 40 1 | 2r
3612: 8 10 | 16 1 | 24 1 | 40 1 | 2b
3627: 8 8 | 16 1 | 24 1 | 40 1 | 0
4067: 8 8 | 16 1 | 24 1 | 40 1 | 0
4265: 8 8 | 16 1 | 24 1 | 40 1 | 0
4450: 8 8 | 16 1 | 24 1 | 40 1 | 0
4466: 8 9 | 16 1 | 24 1 | 40 1 | 0
4470: 8 9 | 16 1 | 24 1 | 40 1 | 2r
4471: 8 9 | 16 1 | 24 1 | 40 1 | 2r
4499: 8 10 | 16 1 | 24 1 | 40 1 | 0
4501: 8 9 | 16 1 | 24 1 | 40 1 | 0
4537: 8 10 | 16 1 | 24 1 | 40 1 | 0
4545: 8 13 | 16 1 | 24 1 | 40 1 | 0
4585: 8 8 | 16 1 | 24 1 | 40 1 | 0
4589: 8 11 | 16 1 | 24 1 | 40 1 | 0
4637: 8 8 | 16 1 | 24 1 | 40 1 | 0
4673: 8 9 | 16 1 | 24 1 | 40 1 | 2b
4731: 8 9 | 16 1 | 24 1 | 40 1 | 0
4753: 8 12 | 16 1 | 24 1 | 40 1 | 2b
4810: 8 8 | 16 1 | 24 1 | 40 1 | 2r
-------------------------------------
best: 8 14 | 16 1 | 24 1 | 40 1 | 0
worst: 9 8 | 16 1 | 24 1 | 40 1 | 2 (38)
Last edited by Joe Ross : 01-05-2013 at 18:01.
|
|
#11
01-05-2013, 18:16
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: 2013 Qual Schedule Analysis
Quote:
So I think we're back to there being no evidence that the matches were not generated randomly with the standard scheduling algorithm.
|
|
#12
01-05-2013, 18:44
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: 2013 Qual Schedule Analysis
At Razorback, there were 101 pairs of teams who played against each other twice. There were 17 pairs of teams who played against each other 3 times. There were 217 pairs of team who did not play against each other. Each team played exactly 12 matches, so I assume there were no surrogates (or am I misunderstanding what a surrogate is, in this context?).
|
|
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|
Linear Mode
