Something is rotten in the state of statistics

[Kpin]

In the statistics http://www.flightradar24.com/share-statistics the top four feeders have the same stats for Up-time and Max. Range and differ only in Avg. range.
Ranking.JPG

So why is F-EIWF1 only in 3rd place when their Avg. Range is higher than F-LBSF1 in 1st and F-KVCB1 in 2nd place?

And actually, how does 2x695 + 2x235 + 249 add up to 10,891 anyway?

Stats are only interesting if they are accurate.

[Milliam]

I've nearly given up on the stats already.

The user stats are also flawed showing the sum of all receivers. Surely it would be better to average all the users feeds.

I also don't understand how the overall score is calculated.

[Tarmo]

I was wondering my own stats.

Based on statistics-website, the max. range for my receiver is 185nm and the uptime 686h.

Based on my feed data in FR24 Account-website, the max. range been 191nm and the uptime is 100%.
I can see only the stats for one week and of course the receiver might been down before, but I have been following last few days and the uptime is just going down at staistics-site. And at the same time at the Account site the stats shows 100%.

Screenshot from statistics-site:
Screenshot_2015-11-08_at_8.38.52_PM.png

Screenshot from my account:
Screenshot_2015-11-08_at_8.29.56_PM.png

[Patrick Reeves]

So why is F-EIWF1 only in 3rd place when their Avg. Range is higher than F-LBSF1 in 1st and F-KVCB1 in 2nd place?

I think it's a rounding error. Al max ranges appear to be rounded to the nearest 5 NM.

[Olov]

In the statistics http://www.flightradar24.com/share-statistics the top four feeders have the same stats for Up-time and Max. Range and differ only in Avg. range.
[ATTACH=CONFIG]6652[/ATTACH]

So why is F-EIWF1 only in 3rd place when their Avg. Range is higher than F-LBSF1 in 1st and F-KVCB1 in 2nd place?

And actually, how does 2x695 + 2x235 + 249 add up to 10,891 anyway?

Stats are only interesting if they are accurate.

Hi,

Thanks for reporting this.. We are looking into it now.

[Olov]

I've nearly given up on the stats already.

The user stats are also flawed showing the sum of all receivers. Surely it would be better to average all the users feeds.

I also don't understand how the overall score is calculated.

Hi Milliam,

If we were to show average of all the users feed, a user with 5 good installations and one bad would be punished for that. What we want is to encourage users to have as many receivers as possible.

/Olov

[Kpin]

Hi,

Thanks for reporting this.. We are looking into it now.

Tack, Olov.
And while you are at it. How come nobody seems to reach 30x24=720 hours of uptime? 695 seems to be max.

[kalmykov]

In the statistics http://www.flightradar24.com/share-statistics the top four feeders have the same stats for Up-time and Max. Range and differ only in Avg. range.
[ATTACH=CONFIG]6652[/ATTACH]

So why is F-EIWF1 only in 3rd place when their Avg. Range is higher than F-LBSF1 in 1st and F-KVCB1 in 2nd place?

And actually, how does 2x695 + 2x235 + 249 add up to 10,891 anyway?

Stats are only interesting if they are accurate.

Hi,

Score is calculated by formula: 2 x Uptime + 2 x Max Range + Avg range summed for the last 30 days

Which means, for each day we calculate daily score: daily_score = 2 x Uptime_daily + 2 x Max_range_daily + Avg_range_daily
And after that, we sum all daily_score for last 30 days.

[Olov]

Tack, Olov.
And while you are at it. How come nobody seems to reach 30x24=720 hours of uptime? 695 seems to be max.

That is a confirmed bug now, will be fixed in the next release. Thanks again for reporting.