Bayesian Weighted Rating Calculator 的评价
Bayesian Weighted Rating Calculator 作者: TheiaDraizer
Arye Pinstein 的评价
评分 1 / 5
来自 Arye Pinstein, 2 个月前21 条评价
- 评分 1 / 5来自 Titus Pullo, 1 个月前That's a scam, but not usual scam. That's really enormous scam. SCAMORZAAAAAAAA!!!! as we call it in Italy. Better use real calculator from my greek friends from the real Pantheon!
Just search for SCIENTIFIC bayesian average calculator - it's made by real decent greek scientist, not these ugly posers. - 评分 1 / 5来自 Maxximilian, 2 个月前
- 评分 1 / 5来自 Californian Chill Guy, 2 个月前
- 评分 1 / 5来自 Ancient Olympic Gods and Chuds Inc., 2 个月前
- 评分 1 / 5来自 Admiral Of King God's fleet, 2 个月前Poor addon, doesn't calculate bayesian waighted (average) at all. There are far better alternatives here in store.
- 评分 1 / 5来自 IExplorerSuperuser007, 2 个月前It doesn't work properly, this is not Bayesian weighted rating. Inputs validation is also buggy. No one tested that at all, poor quality.
- 评分 5 / 5来自 Firefox 用户 18798218, 2 个月前
- 评分 1 / 5来自 Joshua Flux, 2 个月前I believe I’ve already reviewed a previous iteration of this calculator. Still searching for a good tool for my students. Unfortunately, once again, this is neither a Bayesian-adjusted average nor a true calculator. In fact, this version is even worse in terms of the mathematical foundation despite bells and whistles like tsv export and trendy black color scheme.
Yet again, this so-called "calculator" relies on arbitrary, pre-defined "magic numbers" set by the author, making it more of a custom algorithm than a universal tool. The proof? Even the first row of inputs produces unexpected, incorrectly shifted results. The only time it aligns with a Bayesian-weighted method is when extreme values (either the upper or lower bounds) are used.
Speaking of "expected values," the outputs are not even on the same scale as the inputs. Instead of maintaining the original rating scale, the results are converted into a float between 0 and 1. A proper Bayesian-weighted rating should preserve the original scale. Means if the inputs range from [1;10], the outputs should too. Ironically, correcting this requires only a single basic arithmetic operation, yet the author seems unaware of such a fundamental mathematical concept from elementary school. It raises the question: why attempt to develop a math-related add-on without understanding basic school-level math?
Overall, this is a low-quality add-on with inconsistent and incorrect results, relying on arbitrary "magic numbers." It honestly feels like a school project that was released here for publishing trolling readons. To make matters worse, it seems like the same person (likely using a second account) keeps leaving overly positive reviews instead of actually testing or improving the tool. There’s no serious approach here - it’s disappointing, even for a school project.