FIVB ranking: misstep in the right direction
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This work presents and evaluates the ranking algorithm that has been used by Fédération Internationale de Volleyball (FIVB) since 2020. The prominent feature of the FIVB ranking is the use of the probabilistic model, which explicitly calculates the probabilities of the future matches results using the estimated teams' strengths. Such explicit modeling is new in the context of official sport rankings, especially for multi-level outcomes, and we study the optimality of its parameters using both analytical and numerical methods. We conclude that from the modeling perspective, the current thresholds fit well the data but adding the home-field advantage (HFA) would be beneficial. Regarding the algorithm itself, we explain the rationale behind the approximations currently used and show a simple method to find new parameters (numerical score) which improve the performance. We also show that the weighting of the match results is counterproductive.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it