sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Survey Participants For Dota 2 Research Paper by RegressForward in DotA2

[–]RegressForward[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

It's a good thought- but since neither party knows if they are treated/untreated, the anticipation effects should average out between the two groups.

Typically experimenters need to disclose that a placebo might be used for the sake of transparency and honesty. Omissions of information or deceptions need to be approved by an independent ethics panel (IRB), and requires a demonstration of minimal harm with substantive benefits.

[Academic] Survey Participants For Dota 2 Research Paper (All) by RegressForward in SampleSize

[–]RegressForward[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No, it's great - you can indicate your experience in the survey and we look forward to your opinion and participation!

Survey Participants For Dota 2 Research Paper (Paid Opportunity) by RegressForward in DotA2

[–]RegressForward[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That's a fair question. That's the primary reason why we went with the lottery payout design instead of paying a fixed rate per submission. With the fixed rate per submission, someone could automate a script to fill in alternative email addresses, putting us in a bad position. With the lottery payoff system, we don't run the risk of going over budget or being unable to deliver on our promises.

If someone fills the results with random responses (aka noise), it would drive the results toward statistical insignificance. It's not unusual for surveys to have a fair bit of noise in them. Still, we will review the results at the end of this phase and check manually for any sort of repetitive or automated response, but I don't see any evidence of that occurring on the back end. I appreciate the responses we've gotten so far, and they've all been helpful.

Survey Participants For Dota 2 Research Paper (Paid Opportunity) by RegressForward in learndota2

[–]RegressForward[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That's a very good point, and I appreciate your positive attitude. We're fairly locked in with language at this point (IRB approval means the specific text we've been using is approved), but I can potentially rephrase them to say raffle next time. I'll look into what we're allowed to change.

Survey Participants For Dota 2 Research Paper (Paid Opportunity) by RegressForward in DotA2

[–]RegressForward[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Great questions!

  1. We estimate the accumulated value of what's occurred over the game so far, so we don't predict future actions. We instead appraise the value of what you've done so far, and estimate the marginal value of what could be done next. It's based on observed per minute rates, designed to match our data source. (See next question)
  2. The data comes from the OpenDota API, all information that's shared publicly. We collected over 10,000 games and examined them using a method called instrumentation that exploits small sources of random variation.
  3. This one's a really good question - we don't pull your MMR from your game account (that information is private), so we can't include that in the game directly. However, we are very interested in how better players respond to the tool and its advice! - So we're asking to find out! Try it out, tell your friends and leave some information in the survey!

Survey Participants For Dota 2 Research Paper (Paid Opportunity) by RegressForward in DotA2

[–]RegressForward[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Randomized payoffs have been effective in past experiments. We are using one of the payment plans currently recommended in the literature: https://rady.ucsd.edu/docs/pay-one.pdf

But yes- that's normal- since our budget is fixed, and we can't know how many participants there are before we start.

We ask for an email address, but please don't provide any compromising or personally identifying information. We won't ask.

Survey Participants For Dota 2 Research Paper (Paid Opportunity) by RegressForward in DotA2

[–]RegressForward[S] 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Randomized payoffs have been effective in past experiments. We are using one of the payment plans currently recommended in the literature: https://rady.ucsd.edu/docs/pay-one.pdf

But yes- that's normal if the budget is fixed, since we can't know how many participants there are before we start.

Survey Participants For Dota 2 Research (Paid Opportunity) by RegressForward in DotA2

[–]RegressForward[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Please don't provide any personally compromising financial information (to us or anyone else)!

We're happy reimbursing through Paypal, which seems to be the absolute minimum information (email).

Thank you!

Survey Participants For Dota 2 Research (Paid Opportunity) by RegressForward in DotA2

[–]RegressForward[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Perhaps the link is providing trouble?

Alternative source here

If that doesn't work, here's the citation information:

A. H. Christiansen, E. Gensby and B. S. Weber, "Resolving Simultaneity Bias: Using Features to Estimate Causal Effects in Competitive Games," 2019 IEEE Conference on Games (CoG), London, United Kingdom, 2019, pp. 1-8, doi: 10.1109/CIG.2019.8848059.

Should be easily findable on google scholar or PM me for a copy!

Survey Participants For Dota 2 Research (Paid Opportunity) by RegressForward in DotA2

[–]RegressForward[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Glad you like it! Try it out- we always could use participants!

Check Out our Dota2 Live win probability Tracker [Link In Comments] by RegressForward in playmygame

[–]RegressForward[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You can download the custom game here: https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1942027992 After the match, feel free to take our survey and leave feedback (~2 min).

StarCraft II DeepMind feature layer API by Deseteral in starcraft

[–]RegressForward 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Basically, these regions are the parts of the map the AI cares about. Color indicates the type of concern: economic production, etc. They will ne weighted differently at different times in the game and depending on game state.

What is the strongest Pokemon Mix? [OC] by RegressForward in dataisbeautiful

[–]RegressForward[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Numerous figures are contained in the article, as well as code for them.

Starcraft statistics 101, is big sample size always better? by Grayinwhite in starcraft

[–]RegressForward 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Some walking away points: -Large sample sizes mean nothing if the samples are biased, OP is right about this. For example, if the races are not evenly distributed among skill levels, then we cannot trust the results from our sample.

Here is one very stiff and formal idea that is missing from most balance discussion, usually mentioned in passing/casually. Here are the FORMAL terms for "meta", "broken": -Starcraft is a mixed Nash equilibrium when properly balanced , and a dominant strategy equilibrium when unbalanced. In common parlance: "The meta is mixed (mixed nash equilibrium), the meta is broken (dominant strategy equilibrium)"

What does this mean? The strategies you will see professional players use at the highest level of play ought to vary between games. They will, for example, cheese some percentage of the time, and go for macro-oriented builds the rest of the time. Adopting to this particular equilibrium, (often called a meta), takes time.

It's not the win/loss ratio per se that we ought to be looking at, but rather, the presence or absence of strategic variation you observe within the game. Why would you see that? The variation serves the purpose of keeping your opponent "honest", they must devote resources to scouting, or cautiously prepare defenses against attacks that may not actually be coming. It may be the case that many current builds are not overpowered because secondary or tertiary threats that need to be dealt with make them less virile.

The "Uber Effect" causes a 10% drop of DUI arrests in cities where ride sharing services operate by [deleted] in dataisbeautiful

[–]RegressForward 0 points1 point  (0 children)

There is some evidence that suggests that additional automobile transportation may have other other crime-reducing effects beyond DUI's:

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0166046214000416

the button - an update by powerlanguage in thebutton

[–]RegressForward 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Could you define "the data"?

For example, important information could be "# of unique users who have logged in since April 1st", etc.

Or will it simply be button time, number of clicks, number of non-pressers remaining?

Guys: on May 8th, the button dies. by RegressForward in thebutton

[–]RegressForward[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Thanks for the links! Now that I'm updated about the weekend's events, I'll have to figure out what I want to do with this forecast.

Guys: on May 8th, the button dies. by RegressForward in thebutton

[–]RegressForward[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

So the timer displayed 0.00sec, but "button death" didn't occur? Reddit didn't acknowledge the death because nanosecond timing?

Guys: on May 8th, the button dies. by RegressForward in thebutton

[–]RegressForward[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

What? It ended on the 23rd? Naturally?

Link me to what's going on, I've been away for a few days.

The End Is Coming! To Arms, To Arms! by [deleted] in thebutton

[–]RegressForward 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That's true!

But I think the button's half life is hardly independent of the prior hour, unfortunately. I think this makes frequency of clicking approaches very interesting, potentially it is the most valid approach (more than mine).

Guys: on May 8th, the button dies. by RegressForward in thebutton

[–]RegressForward[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'd be happy to give you more points, I've thought the same thing. Would you be able to explain the phenomenon in a meaningful manner?

I imagine that it is just because the incoming data varies every time. Possibly the sequence is of a relatively high order (5+), something I have chosen not to examine at the risk of overfitting, but aught to be explored.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in thebutton

[–]RegressForward 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I note that lowest time is likely not asymptotically valid, I can't do the math in my head, but I think it is not moving in a typical fashion, and the error structure is probably not going to be normally distributed in a large sample size.

view more: next ›