MHB What does normalized mean in this context?

  • Thread starter Thread starter find_the_fun
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Mean
Click For Summary
In the context of the paper, "normalized" refers to the process of calculating normalized interruption time (NIT) by dividing each user's viewed length by the original duration of the video. This approach accounts for the variability in how much of the video users actually watch. The discussion clarifies that NIT is not calculated by the sum of interruptions divided by non-interrupted times or total time watched, but rather by the entire duration of the video. The consensus is that normalization helps provide a more accurate metric for playback interruptions relative to the video's length. Understanding this concept is crucial for interpreting the author's findings effectively.
find_the_fun
Messages
147
Reaction score
0
In a paper I'm reading the author keeps using the word "normalized". What does it mean?
We use playback interruption time as our main metric.
However, since the viewed length by a user varies widely,
instead of just measuring total interruption time of each view,
we normalize it by the viewed length, which we call the
normalized interruption time (NIT).

Does it mean dividing the sum of the interuptions by the sum of the non-interrupted times? Or diving it by the total time thus far? Or dividing by the entire time of the video?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
It means diving each viewed length by the original duration of the video.
However, you must tell about the exact origin of this paragraph.
 
phymat said:
It means diving each viewed length by the original duration of the video.
However, you must tell about the exact origin of this paragraph.

Dividing by the entire duration of the video or up to the point watched?
 
find_the_fun said:
Dividing by the entire duration of the video or up to the point watched?

Usually it would mean dividing by the entire duration of the video.
 
Thread 'Erroneously  finding discrepancy in transpose rule'
Obviously, there is something elementary I am missing here. To form the transpose of a matrix, one exchanges rows and columns, so the transpose of a scalar, considered as (or isomorphic to) a one-entry matrix, should stay the same, including if the scalar is a complex number. On the other hand, in the isomorphism between the complex plane and the real plane, a complex number a+bi corresponds to a matrix in the real plane; taking the transpose we get which then corresponds to a-bi...

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
60
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 56 ·
2
Replies
56
Views
7K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
2K