I thought you meant the time (human many games many events scale, time) slope of when a new wave of swarm testing at population level would examine a novelty (de facto in the population and events, even if resurrecting previously "refuted" in history), and then explore that bush** in some kind of "all the new rage" until dust settles and people find new "refutations" or evidence that it might just still be just playable, and onto the next wave of promised land.
So, what do you mean by slope. It seems a post interpreted it as sided imbalance of odds (white vs black sides).
I thought you wanted to look at human time, say year time resolution, evolution of the popularity. I think my own thoughts must have spilled over my reading of the title.
However, the question of the post, seems to be more about how to process the Lichess repository of openings sequences with names associated. One has to remember that the purpose of that repository, although dist angled from the opening explorer repository, is to create a structure for the unique naming at each use individual level exploring that decision tree, with knowledge of which decisions from the standard initial were taken (although some input positions do seem to output names, without having that).
The technical aspects. I do not know how to relate that exercise, which is interesting to share, if we were to try to do the same kind of thing, it is good that someone has gone through that trouble. But maybe you could explain the title better, and its relation to the last statement of the op.
>Popularity slope of chess openings
>Chess openings gain traction
>Then I looked for other sources to see how a opening trend in popularity.
>surge in popularity
Those 3 phrases led me to believe it was the human popularity time series were interested in.
But then you start talking about SF. and the named opening sequence repository, which is not at all about putting only the most current population named opening sequences, but providing a complete covering of unique names for all the lichess games bad or elite, that do have some name in some other dispersed sources of chess database of opening knowledge value.
The opening explorer per game position instance (as input) is where the popularity is.
Maybe I thought it was not yet done, this question of data analysis of dynamic trends or just time series of popularity on the Y axis, and some time on the X-axis.. for a given "all the new ragte" or novelty positoin under some group scrutinty at high level and perhaps propagating in lower tiers or bands of ratings
But maybe that is already researched, and you are seeking alternate factors or reasons, that SF analysis might suggest as hypotheses for its models of what matters on the chessboard position information.. for any of opening phase named prefix sequence from that repository.
You would like to use SF to scan for potential for past waves or future waves? or swarm or surge.
Maybe compare the time series of popularities with the hypotheses you might pull out of SF per position anallyses?
But do we have some clarity at data analyssis level, some confirmation that we could actually discern such convergence of attention at many player pairings level, over some human event time window, and up and plateay or peak, and then a drop to background playable frequence of visit level.. Where is such prior work. And maybe then there is the quesiton of many initial seqeunces arriving at the same new or reassessed as new position of interest.
So, did I fill in the gaps between the SF stuff, the .tsv files of named seququences, and the excerpts of your experimental output computer traces? sorry for the wording. I am not sure what those are, if raw or not, or if you are sharing new candiates by SF for future new trends? I know I am missing something. So, you can disregard my attempts to make a story of what I saw, and perhaps present your own design of experiement. The questions. What is known already, that I might be oblivious to, and perhaps how the posts above fit in that research idea of yours. It might just be a part of something, and you are taclking that end of the question.
>Is there a way to sort the lichess openings by popularity?
So now that is the other end. We do not have that at dataset level, as I mentioned we only have an instance query tool.
Also, I am not sure that the question is well posed. As what do you mean by openings? The sequences themselves, the paths of them till the last position that would have the "opning" ID or name you have in mind? or is the "opening" that last positoin itself. Which might be reached more than one path from the initial standard.
I assume a "novelty" might be a new position from a new move, being exploreed, or rediscovered at high level.
So there might be more than one questino in your question, for each possible meaning of "opening".
But that still leaves the title question of slope?
Did you mean: if we had all the openings (however defined) popularity data at some given band of ratings or tier in the event sequence time scale, perhaps month, or year.. There might be fluctuations, and maybe the demographics and human diversity at each pairing events or player pairs, would not have such a grouping of opening steering preference, and then what kind of statistical signal in that would be worthy of the word trend or "slope" positive signal that a trend is surging..
And then the relation to your other side of the research ideas, that of using SF as predictor of which positions in the set of "opening" as you might allow in your statement intent, are likely to be a trend candiate. I don't think it is a bad idea, although it is only a guess or question, that SF might provide some bias to filter among the many fluctuating up slope candidates, to dissmiss those more often that are low on SF radar, and consider more likely those apparent up surges that SF would have favored.
But I think I am missing the basic time series data analysis of that phenomenon you might be thinking well known or characterized. Can anyone help the op on that regard, and me also. I am curious about first characterizing the notions of the op. It would help make well formed questions of statistical or mathematical nature that might harness the scripting struggle and SF vetted hypotheses above.
sorry for the novel. I can delete. now tired. maybe some "AI" could shrink this and not denature it.
** Bush: always a bush at some chess ply depth mask above turn by turn incompressible trivial mask, another side-hypothesis, maybe needing transversal scope too, not just depth, to say it is a bush at that scope of breadth.
