lichess.org
Donate

How to group time management?

<Comment deleted by user>
<Comment deleted by user>

What can I say? Good work on specifying the datasets! In this age of big datasets, we need to be looking at our datasets and characterize them very well. As what goes in usually has an impact on what comes out. Using small subsets is fine for exploring and generating hypotheses that might be tested with scale. I did not read carefully the whole blog. But I read enough for what I just said. Good job. I will keep this on my to readlist.. no ETA.

What can I say? Good work on specifying the datasets! In this age of big datasets, we need to be looking at our datasets and characterize them very well. As what goes in usually has an impact on what comes out. Using small subsets is fine for exploring and generating hypotheses that might be tested with scale. I did not read carefully the whole blog. But I read enough for what I just said. Good job. I will keep this on my to readlist.. no ETA.

Was there ever any intent to try and assess results of the different styles? Or was this only limited to attempting to identify some broad, "reasonable" characteristics of time utilization?

Was there ever any intent to try and assess results of the different styles? Or was this only limited to attempting to identify some broad, "reasonable" characteristics of time utilization?

This is interesting. You gave a lot of detail about the methodology and made abstract conclusions about the characteristics of the clusters. But I was hoping to gain some sort of actual insight from the analysis. That would normally be the main focus of the "Conclusion" section.

This is interesting. You gave a lot of detail about the methodology and made abstract conclusions about the characteristics of the clusters. But I was hoping to gain some sort of actual insight from the analysis. That would normally be the main focus of the "Conclusion" section.

@bbryan said in #8:

This is interesting. You gave a lot of detail about the methodology and made abstract conclusions about the characteristics of the clusters. But I was hoping to gain some sort of actual insight from the analysis. That would normally be the main focus of the "Conclusion" section.

In the beginning of the blog there is a higher level map of the intent. This blog being a part 1 using a smaller dataset for exploratory data analysis (i have not read yet that part), so I would expect the task of part one, a exploratory project to conclude with hypotheses inspired by the method section, bigger sample verification pending.

I would expect those to be revisited with the bigger dataset in a part 2, if I understood the preamble, something I have appreciated of all the previous blogs by this author by the way. I value sharing the design of a procedural description in advance, a mini table of content that allows autonomous reading and attention weight for the now more aware reader. personal taste for technical communication, I would guess.. We can reason with the author better, with adjusted expectations.

@bbryan said in #8: > This is interesting. You gave a lot of detail about the methodology and made abstract conclusions about the characteristics of the clusters. But I was hoping to gain some sort of actual insight from the analysis. That would normally be the main focus of the "Conclusion" section. In the beginning of the blog there is a higher level map of the intent. This blog being a part 1 using a smaller dataset for exploratory data analysis (i have not read yet that part), so I would expect the task of part one, a exploratory project to conclude with hypotheses inspired by the method section, bigger sample verification pending. I would expect those to be revisited with the bigger dataset in a part 2, if I understood the preamble, something I have appreciated of all the previous blogs by this author by the way. I value sharing the design of a procedural description in advance, a mini table of content that allows autonomous reading and attention weight for the now more aware reader. personal taste for technical communication, I would guess.. We can reason with the author better, with adjusted expectations.

The motivation section speaks of "lichess players' gameplay patterns" and "Time and Time spent and the relationship between them" which are quite abstract ideas which may or may not lead to actual insights. I read the entire blog and felt that it was very heavy on methodological detail and very light on meaningful conclusions.

The motivation section speaks of "lichess players' gameplay patterns" and "Time and Time spent and the relationship between them" which are quite abstract ideas which may or may not lead to actual insights. I read the entire blog and felt that it was very heavy on methodological detail and very light on meaningful conclusions.