The DOI matches its Crossref record.
THE TREATMENT OF TIES IN RANKING PROBLEMS
Abstract
1. When a number of objects are presented for ranking by an observer there sometimes arise cases in which he is unable to express a preference in regard to certain of them and ' ranks them equal ' or regards them as ' tying'. The effect may arise either because the objects really are indistinguishable, so far as the quality under consideration is concerned, or because the observer is unable to discern such differences as exist. Ties of this character are by no means uncommon—and indeed may be more the rule than the exception in some classes of work—and it is desirable to have a systematic method of dealing with them. In this paper I consider the effect of ties on coefficients of rank correlation, the estimation of rankings and the measurement of concordance in judges. RANK CORRELATIONS 2. The method of allocating ranking numbers to tied individuals in general use is to average the ranks which they cover. For instance, if the observer ties the third and fourth members each is allotted the number 3£, and if he ties the second to the seventh inclusive, each is allotted the number £(2 + 3 + 4+5 + 6+7) = 4$. This is known as the mid-rank method and is the only one I shall consider. In fact I have seen only two other courses
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Calliope: Automatic Visual Data Story Generation from a Spreadsheet
Shi, D., Xu, X., Sun, F., Shi, Y., & Cao, N. (2021) · IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics · doi:10.1109/tvcg.2020.3030403 · Cited by 182
State of What Art? A Call for Multi-Prompt LLM Evaluation
Mizrahi, M., Kaplan, G., Malkin, D., Dror, R., Shahaf, D., & Stanovsky, G. (2024) · Transactions of the Association for Computational Linguistics · doi:10.1162/tacl_a_00681 · Cited by 113
(2023) · doi:10.1145/3510003.3510060 · Cited by 88
Overcoming Multi-Model Forgetting in One-Shot NAS With Diversity Maximization
Zhang, M., Li, H., Pan, S., Chang, X., & Su, S. (2020) · 2020 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) · doi:10.1109/cvpr42600.2020.00783 · Cited by 83
Sexton, D. J., Bentz, M. L., Welsh, R. M., Derado, G., Furin, W., Rose, L. J., Noble-Wang, J., Pacilli, M., McPherson, T. D., Black, S., et al. (2021) · Clinical Infectious Diseases · doi:10.1093/cid/ciab327 · Cited by 81
Evaluating Correctness and Faithfulness of Instruction-Following Models for Question Answering
Adlakha, V., BehnamGhader, P., Lu, X. H., Meade, N., & Reddy, S. (2024) · Transactions of the Association for Computational Linguistics · doi:10.1162/tacl_a_00667 · Cited by 74
An Experimental Exploration of Marsaglia's xorshift Generators, Scrambled
Vigna, S. (2016) · ACM Transactions on Mathematical Software · doi:10.1145/2845077 · Cited by 55
“The first and most important is TestU01, a test suite developed by L’Ecuyer and Simard [2007] that contains several tests oriented towards the generation of uniform real numbers in [0 .”
BackgroundRACE: Retrieval-augmented Commit Message Generation
Shi, E., Wang, Y., Tao, W., Du, L., Zhang, H., Han, S., Zhang, D., & Sun, H. (2022) · Proceedings of the 2022 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing · doi:10.18653/v1/2022.emnlp-main.372 · Cited by 42
Maroto-Gómez, M., Castro-González, Á., Castillo, J. C., Malfaz, M., & Salichs, M. Á. (2023) · User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction · doi:10.1007/s11257-022-09321-2 · Cited by 37
Marchesi, R., Micheletti, N., I-Hsien Kuo, N., Barbieri, S., Jurman, G., & Osmani, V. (2025) · PLOS Computational Biology · doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1013080 · Cited by 29
Metadata
- Authors
- KENDALL, M. G.
- Venue
- Biometrika
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 1945
- Volume
- 33
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 239-251
- ISSN
- 0006-3444 (ISSN-L)
- 1464-3510
- OpenAlex
- W1979354511
- Cited by
- 809
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 11.06
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
