The Evaluation of Rating Systems in Team-based Battle Royale Games

Authors: Arman Dehpanah, Muheeb Faizan Ghori, Jonathan Gemmell, Bamshad Mobasher

Updated references -- 10 pages, 1 figure, Accepted in the 23rd International Conference on Artificial Intelligence (ICAI'21)
AI-generated keywords: Rating systems Evaluation Metrics NDCG Fair gameplay

AI-generated Key Points

⚠The license of the paper does not allow us to build upon its content and the key points are generated using the paper metadata rather than the full article.

  • Online competitive games use rating systems to match players with similar skills
  • Less attention has been paid to evaluating the performance of these rating systems
  • The paper "The Evaluation of Rating Systems in Team-based Battle Royale Games" explores the utility of several metrics for evaluating three popular rating systems on a real-world dataset of over 25,000 team battle royale matches
  • Results suggest considerable differences in the evaluation patterns among the metrics studied
  • Normalized discounted cumulative gain (NDCG) demonstrated more reliable performance and flexibility compared to other metrics studied
  • Evaluating rating systems is crucial for ensuring fair gameplay experiences for all players
  • The authors' findings can inform future research aimed at developing better evaluation methods for rating systems in online competitive games to ensure fairness for all participants.
Also access our AI generated: Comprehensive summary, Lay summary, Blog-like article; or ask questions about this paper to our AI assistant.

Abstract: Online competitive games have become a mainstream entertainment platform. To create a fair and exciting experience, these games use rating systems to match players with similar skills. While there has been an increasing amount of research on improving the performance of these systems, less attention has been paid to how their performance is evaluated. In this paper, we explore the utility of several metrics for evaluating three popular rating systems on a real-world dataset of over 25,000 team battle royale matches. Our results suggest considerable differences in their evaluation patterns. Some metrics were highly impacted by the inclusion of new players. Many could not capture the real differences between certain groups of players. Among all metrics studied, normalized discounted cumulative gain (NDCG) demonstrated more reliable performance and more flexibility. It alleviated most of the challenges faced by the other metrics while adding the freedom to adjust the focus of the evaluations on different groups of players.

Submitted to arXiv on 28 May. 2021

Ask questions about this paper to our AI assistant

You can also chat with multiple papers at once here.

⚠The license of the paper does not allow us to build upon its content and the AI assistant only knows about the paper metadata rather than the full article.

AI assistant instructions?

Results of the summarizing process for the arXiv paper: 2105.14069v2

⚠This paper's license doesn't allow us to build upon its content and the summarizing process is here made with the paper's metadata rather than the article.

  • Comprehensive Summary
  • Key points
  • Layman's Summary
  • Blog article
The popularity of online competitive games has led to the use of rating systems to match players with similar skills, creating a fair and exciting experience. However, while there has been a significant amount of research on improving these systems, less attention has been paid to how their performance is evaluated. In their paper titled "The Evaluation of Rating Systems in Team-based Battle Royale Games," Arman Dehpanah, Muheeb Faizan Ghori, Jonathan Gemmell, and Bamshad Mobasher explore the utility of several metrics for evaluating three popular rating systems on a real-world dataset of over 25,000 team battle royale matches. Their results suggest considerable differences in the evaluation patterns among the metrics studied. Some metrics were highly impacted by the inclusion of new players while many could not capture the real differences between certain groups of players. Among all metrics studied, normalized discounted cumulative gain (NDCG) demonstrated more reliable performance and flexibility. It alleviated most of the challenges faced by other metrics while adding freedom to adjust the focus of evaluations on different groups of players. This study highlights that evaluating rating systems is crucial for ensuring fair gameplay experiences for all players. The authors' findings can inform future research aimed at developing better evaluation methods for rating systems in online competitive games to ensure fairness for all participants.

Assess the quality of the AI-generated content by voting

Score: 0

Why do we need votes?

Votes are used to determine whether we need to re-run our summarizing tools. If the count reaches -10, our tools can be restarted.

The previous summary was created more than a year ago and can be re-run (if necessary) by clicking on the Run button below.

⚠The license of this specific paper does not allow us to build upon its content and the summarizing tools will be run using the paper metadata rather than the full article. However, it still does a good job, and you can also try our tools on papers with more open licenses.

Similar papers summarized with our AI tools

Navigate through even more similar papers through a

tree representation

Disclaimer: The AI-based summarization tool and virtual assistant provided on this website may not always provide accurate and complete summaries or responses. We encourage you to carefully review and evaluate the generated content to ensure its quality and relevance to your needs.