[steemiq.me] How smart is your writing? Find out your SteemIQ!
Ever wondered how smart you are based on your posts?
Today I am releasing version 0.1 of SteemIQ. SteemIQ uses Flesch-Kincaid grade level and a number of other metrics such as number of difficult words, number of unique words etc. to generate an IQ between 0 to 200. A user must have at least 3 blog posts in English in order to calculate their SteemIQ. Here is a picture of my SteemIQ as calculated on the website:
What makes SteemIQ different?
- It does not correlate to reputation, Steem Power, amount of money or any existing metric on steemit.
- Dynamic algorithm : the more intellectual posts you make the higher your SteemIQ will go.
- Ever changing : development will make this metric a lot more accurate as bugs are found and fixed.
- Complete sentences will make the IQ more accurate.
Things learned from developing SteemIQ
- There are a lot of dummy accounts on steemit like aizen01, aizen02, aizen03, aizen04 ...
- Only around 500 users of the first 5000 alphabetically have more than 3 posts with complete english sentences.
- English is a requirement as currently any other language skews the calculation of your SteemIQ.
Version 0.1 Release Log
- Supports calculating SteemIQ of any user with 3 posts in English that include complete sentences.
- That's it for now, though there will be many new features coming soon!
Development Details
- Uses @xeroc's wonderful Piston Steem Library
- Uses Python + Flask microframework with AngularJS on the frontend
Special thanks to Adam Mackintosh @agm1984, Ikkyu Sojun @limitless, and Max for being my guidance and feedback givers during the development process. You guys rock!
That's pretty neat. I plugged in a few names to test it out.
This definitely hurts English as a Second language writers and people who post some photographs or images. For example @piedpiper is under 100 and he's a fairly smart guy, but he's posted some graphics.
I also see a preference for long posts, or am I mistaken there? My IQ comes out high and @cryptogee @steemship @firepower and @federicopistono are some others over 140. Long posts is what we have in common, I think.
It's important to be concise and make your words count; quality can come in smaller packages.
Definitely agree, and I created a relatively brief post showing that SteemIQ can be increased with well written sentences. I am of course going to perform more tests and see what works, what doesn't and refine the algorithm. Thank you for the input. I am also thinking about doing some rudimentary image analysis, and adding a weight on images.
https://steemit.com/test/@nphacker/this-is-a-test-for-a-short-steemiq-enhancing-post
This tool is awesome! I'm at 120. :P
I don't really follow PP, but i get the impression that most of the content he posts is actually embedded video.. (andarchy probably has the same problem).
TBH, ive always kind of felt that writers that do that should transcribe and post text in addition (there are ppl of fiverr that would do it fairly cheaply)... after all, the whole point of putting content on a chain is so that its not under the control of a central actor
This is really excellent work. If the demand is there, this algorithm can be augmented to provide ultra serious feedback for content writers. The visionary goal is to achieve an objective rating you can use. It favours longer posts of the complex nature. We reason that complexity and verbosity are key indicators of information-richness and potential value to the community.
@nphacker is one of the more objective thinkers I have met , and it is worth noting that Max Polaczuck is a statistics wizard. He is going to be a key contributor to the accuracy and precision of this metric analyzer algorithm.
I strongly encourage everyone to not abuse this system. There is no fruit for you there. Use it to help yourself to produce useful content. We are approaching a world in which innovation, learning, and knowledge will become at the forefront, so you can use this to tune your contributions.
One future increment of this tool may involve some kind of a leaderboard, and @nphacker is looking at introducing some negative feedback loop logic, so the tool will disfavour and punish abuse tactics. I recommend staying away from grayhat and blackhat manipulation of the tool. We study your posts, and your SteemIQ will reveal your methodology. One might appear at the top of the fraud leaderboard.
My best tip to anyone is, every time you make an assertion, follow it with a 'because'. This key word reveals your reasoning and support. This is more important than your assertion itself. This is how you operate objectively. This is how scientists will notice you--through your 'significant-value' contributions. Without supplying reasoning, you are contributing pseudo-valuable content because a reader cannot tell how you arrived at your assertion. This is why verbosity is a key trait of objective information suppliers.
Thanks,
Adam
Cool product, but I wonder if complexity amd verbosity aren't quite the very best indicators of quality. For my part, I try to make sure that my posts are accessible to a wide audience even when I'm writing about complex topics like my game theory articles. Not to say I'm not interested in your tool, of course.
Complex short posts also = higher IQ, so its not just about length. Size does not matter. It helps though. :)
Thanks Adam! For the great tips and inspiring this product from giving feedback and suggestions at all of the angles!
~Np
Excellent advice Adam! I've been telling you that you should start posting! :D
OK
Lol, the site dev @ned is dumber than average according to this tool
He hasn't posted a lot, and his short posts (for testing reasons and etc.) are punished by the algorithm. Complete sentences and more text content = higher IQ accuracy. Take for example: https://steemit.com/steem/@ned/slack
question -- do post replies count, or just OP's?
Just OP's
amazing tool we should be all using it :) keep on steeming steemers!
@nphacker @agm1984 and I (and Max who is not on Steemit yet) are working on refining the formula. Expect to see some changes in your score over the next few days. Comment your thoughts on this. Thanks!
Thanks Ikkyu! If you guys have any thoughts on how the algorithm can be made better please post below, currently its just a linear log metric.
135... I guess I've been doing something well. :)
Followed and gave you a few upvotes. Just keep on posting and once we refine SteemIQ more, you will definitely get noticed!
Btw, I think I made your rep level go up! Congrats!
Yep, you have this great post:
https://steemit.com/psychology/@shneakysquirrel/hidden-genius-emotional-intelligence
You definitely did! Thanks a ton on the follow! Certainly looking forward to see this tool evolve.
@nphacker did issac.asimov belong to you?
https://steemd.com/@aizen01
The aizen accounts, as well as most of the numbered "dummy accounts" like the badgers, are miners... (you can see them finding POW on the steemd link). you have to create multiple different accounts to mine, because your miner has to "sit out" while its waiting for a witness.
So theyre dummies in a way, but most of them arent sybil armies or anything.. needing to create them is just part of how mining works.
Hmm interesting, I was ranked at 117.68.
I'll agree with some of the feedback here, in that I think intellectual masturbation isn't very accessible to larger audiences. I have some books that are super wordy like this, and everytime I read them, I feel like the author has started down vast meta-tangential ideas, distracting from the point they were originally trying to make.
I think it would be great if this tool took into account ease of comprehension somehow, while still balancing accuracy of assertion. Like, how many readers were actually able to take away something new / valuable / actionable that they hadn't known about before?
Truth brotha.
Agreed, be on the lookout :)
Very interesting. And it prompts some good questions for bloggers:
Personally, I enjoy content that is easy to read but shows a level of competence in the subject. Not the super technical "you must be a PHD to understand this" posts, but the posts that demonstrate someone has a good understanding of their topic and can describe it to the public well.
When people go out of there way to increase the reading level of their posts as high as possible, that turns me off. It is like word masturbation where the author gets off on their sesquipedalian posts.
fap fap fap
Very good points. So far, I have yet to see any super technical content on Steemit, although some people have claimed that some of my posts are like that. :/
We will be continuously improving the algorithm and listening to user feedback.
Currently, most of the top voted posts are either personal stories or updates to Steemit. We seek to provide a tool for people to find posts that are intelligent and in a wide variety of topics. #academicspotlight substeemit is also doing great work.
I got 112.06...is that good enough? Definitely looking to improve more :)