2016/11/16 by Nhien Pham Hoang Bao, Bao, Nhien Pham Hoang, Hiroyuki Iida +1
Computer Science · Economics, Econometrics and Finance · Psychology · #Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI) #FOS: Computer and information sciences #Gambling Behavior and Treatments #Sports Analytics and Performance #Video Analysis and Summarization
paper · pdf · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1611.08499
openalex publication_date 2016/11/16 · openalex created_date 2025/10/10 · openalex updated_date 2026/07/28
This paper explores a novel way for analyzing the tournament structures to find a best suitable one for the tournament under consideration. It concerns about three aspects such as tournament conducting cost, competitiveness development and ranking precision. It then proposes a new method using progress tree to detect potential throwaway matches. The analysis performed using the proposed method reveals the strengths and weaknesses of tournament structures. As a conclusion, single elimination is best if we want to qualify one winner only, all matches conducted are exciting in term of competitiveness. Double elimination with proper seeding system is a better choice if we want to qualify more winners. A reasonable number of extra matches need to be conducted in exchange of being able to qualify top four winners. Round-robin gives reliable ranking precision for all participants. However, its conduction cost is very high, and it fails to maintain competitiveness development.