Home
Articles
Photos
Interviews
Forums
New posts
Search forums
Georgia Tech Recruiting
Dashboard
What's new
New posts
New profile posts
Latest activity
Chat
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Home
Forums
Georgia Tech Athletics
Georgia Tech Basketball
Bracketology 2024
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="MtnWasp" data-source="post: 1005565" data-attributes="member: 4110"><p>Thanks to NavyNuke for posting this info. From his pasted memo of explanation of the NET:</p><p></p><p>"The exact algorithm is unknown." </p><p></p><p>This speaks volumes. Why the opacity? Two obvious reasons are that, one, they do not want the algorithm scrutinized. That likely means that it is flawed to begin with. Two, The failure to open the algorithm for review means that they do not want to be held accountable for following the protocol. I think it is pretty cirtain that the selection committee can disregard the algorithm if they so choose. If that is the case then why have the algorithm to begin with? They have it as an excuse. They can state that they use the algorithm to suggest that they are scientific and unbiased. "We chose team 'X' over team "Y" because that is what the algorithm said to do." But then, if they disregard the model in a selection or seeding, they don't have to say anything because use of the algorithm is implied.</p><p></p><p>This is not scientific. Science does not hide procedures and methods from thorough review. </p><p></p><p>The NET algorithm employs (in some fashion) two nebulous "parts," the "Team value Index "TVI," and the "Adjusted Net efficiency rating." Each of these tools is not defined. Each takes into account the "quality" or "strength" of the opponent but never is it defined how quality or strength is derived. Again, there is absolutely no statement on how the initial power ratings are input into the system and how those guesses impact the entire process throughout the season.</p><p></p><p>Again, if the entire system depends on accurate initial inputs of power ratings, and there is no valid way to assess initial power ratings before games are played, then the entire system is an artifice. If the initial inputs are subjective crap, putting the crap input through a fancy computer model does not mean you get anything out of the other end that is not subjective crap.</p><p></p><p>This is at the core of scientism. Take a subjective, agendized hypothesis, piggy-back that info into some hazy mathematics that few understand or have the inclination to proof read to launder the subjective information to make it appear quantitative. But it isn't quantitative. It is just made to LOOK quantitative.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="MtnWasp, post: 1005565, member: 4110"] Thanks to NavyNuke for posting this info. From his pasted memo of explanation of the NET: "The exact algorithm is unknown." This speaks volumes. Why the opacity? Two obvious reasons are that, one, they do not want the algorithm scrutinized. That likely means that it is flawed to begin with. Two, The failure to open the algorithm for review means that they do not want to be held accountable for following the protocol. I think it is pretty cirtain that the selection committee can disregard the algorithm if they so choose. If that is the case then why have the algorithm to begin with? They have it as an excuse. They can state that they use the algorithm to suggest that they are scientific and unbiased. "We chose team 'X' over team "Y" because that is what the algorithm said to do." But then, if they disregard the model in a selection or seeding, they don't have to say anything because use of the algorithm is implied. This is not scientific. Science does not hide procedures and methods from thorough review. The NET algorithm employs (in some fashion) two nebulous "parts," the "Team value Index "TVI," and the "Adjusted Net efficiency rating." Each of these tools is not defined. Each takes into account the "quality" or "strength" of the opponent but never is it defined how quality or strength is derived. Again, there is absolutely no statement on how the initial power ratings are input into the system and how those guesses impact the entire process throughout the season. Again, if the entire system depends on accurate initial inputs of power ratings, and there is no valid way to assess initial power ratings before games are played, then the entire system is an artifice. If the initial inputs are subjective crap, putting the crap input through a fancy computer model does not mean you get anything out of the other end that is not subjective crap. This is at the core of scientism. Take a subjective, agendized hypothesis, piggy-back that info into some hazy mathematics that few understand or have the inclination to proof read to launder the subjective information to make it appear quantitative. But it isn't quantitative. It is just made to LOOK quantitative. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
What jersey number did Joshua Nesbitt wear?
Post reply
Home
Forums
Georgia Tech Athletics
Georgia Tech Basketball
Bracketology 2024
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top