The Typology of Curation: What Kinds of Curators We Have Now?

clayop (73)in #stats • 8 years ago (edited)

Two days ago, I posted How Much Do Whales Influences on Rewards?. After posting it and having discussion with others, I found this study can provide more deeper understanding of curation patterns. As a follow-up study, this post is focusing on typology of curations: grouping curators by certain patterns.

Method

I used k-means clustering to classify the top 100 curators (by influence) into four groups. The sample's total influence is 99.5%, which means almost all of curation is done by the top 100 curators.

Data and Variables

The data is from Steem blockchain from 2016/8/16 to 2016/9/10.

Influence: Percentage of payout a curator used
Power: Percentage of Steem Power a curator owns
IPR: Ratio between influence and power (Utilization of Steem Power)
N: Number of votes a curator casted during the study period
Range: Number of unique writers a curator voted for
Mean: Average number of votes per writer
Max: Maximum number of votes on a writer repeatedly
StDev: Standard deviation among a curator's votes on each writer

The following table presents some descriptive statistics about the four groups.

Group	Sum_Influence	Avr_Influence	Sum_Power	Avr_Power	Avr_IPR	Avr_N	Avr_Range	Avr_Mean	Avr_Max	Avr_StDev
1	15.86	0.51	30.33	0.98	0.52	120.51	123.71	0.97	5.97	0.90
2	46.99	1.20	18.11	0.46	2.59	582.55	329.72	1.77	24.09	2.65
3	31.83	1.38	10.82	0.47	2.94	802.70	260.96	3.08	61.93	6.58
4	5.27	0.75	1.35	0.19	3.90	1410.57	164.57	8.57	70.00	12.08
Total	99.95	-	60.61	-	1.65	547.91	238.48	2.51	30.39	3.67

1. Lazy Lions

Curator in this group show low utilization of Steem Power on average (0.52), but they still have a great potential to become influential curators since they have more power than the other groups (0.98). The list of curators is as follow.

Account	Influence	Power	IPR	N	Range	Mean	Max	StDev
@dantheman	3.41	2.54	1.34	222	340	0.65	10	1.24
@jamesc	2.72	3.19	0.85	150	135	1.11	14	1.86
@rainman	1.80	1.49	1.21	203	171	1.19	10	1.31
@ned	1.56	5.72	0.27	45	254	0.18	3	0.37
@val-a	0.88	2.80	0.32	26	77	0.33	2	0.49
@fuzzyvest	0.57	0.58	0.97	306	214	1.43	12	1.93
@dan	0.44	4.49	0.10	1	12	0.09	1	0.36
@witness.svk	0.42	0.54	0.78	169	130	1.30	10	1.24
@wackou	0.34	0.62	0.55	92	57	1.61	10	1.59
@skywalker	0.28	0.63	0.44	18	13	1.38	3	0.62
@laonie	0.27	0.14	1.87	1230	1227	1.00	17	1.32
@blackjack	0.26	1.00	0.26	15	12	1.25	2	0.43
@roadscape	0.26	0.65	0.40	54	60	0.91	4	0.77
@lafona-miner	0.25	0.28	0.91	201	148	1.36	8	1.00
@firstclass	0.21	0.66	0.31	17	12	1.42	4	0.86
@arhag	0.19	0.61	0.31	30	40	0.75	3	0.60
@freedom	0.18	0.53	0.34	17	12	1.42	4	0.86
@cryptoctopus	0.17	0.15	1.13	147	111	1.33	9	1.17
@proskynneo	0.16	0.54	0.30	59	82	0.72	2	0.44
@datasecuritynode	0.16	0.44	0.36	21	18	1.17	3	0.50
@books	0.14	0.16	0.85	17	13	1.31	4	0.82
@disney	0.14	0.15	0.92	16	13	1.23	2	0.42
@bmw	0.14	0.18	0.74	17	13	1.31	4	0.82
@samupaha	0.14	0.20	0.67	-2	241	-0.01	17	2.24
@alphabet	0.13	0.33	0.40	15	14	1.07	2	0.26
@excalibur	0.11	0.32	0.36	15	14	1.07	2	0.26
@analisa	0.11	0.40	0.27	3	3	1.00	1	0.00
@arsahk	0.11	0.39	0.28	4	3	1.33	2	0.47
@bitcoin2016	0.11	0.42	0.25	17	12	1.42	3	0.76
@delegate.lafona	0.10	0.10	1.03	201	148	1.36	8	1.00
@cryptogee	0.10	0.08	1.25	411	236	1.74	12	1.79

2. Hidden Gem Explorers

This group consists of the biggest part of the total influence (46.99%) and they have the highest range and the second lowest Max and StDev. This implies that their votes are dispersed to various authors.

Account	Influence	Power	IPR	N	Range	Mean	Max	StDev
@blocktrades	11.29	3.71	3.04	630	486	1.30	22	1.51
@berniesanders	10.41	2.97	3.50	997	787	1.27	15	1.71
@tombstone	3.62	1.87	1.94	321	196	1.64	12	2.18
@summon	3.00	1.29	2.32	364	221	1.65	14	1.99
@complexring	2.49	0.67	3.69	958	544	1.76	40	3.08
@nextgencrypto	1.75	0.51	3.41	1061	759	1.40	14	1.51
@pharesim	1.64	0.87	1.88	837	406	2.06	54	3.93
@silversteem	1.55	0.46	3.37	1381	760	1.82	15	2.08
@riverhead	1.55	0.69	2.25	518	336	1.54	13	1.41
@steemit200	1.54	0.56	2.74	438	178	2.46	14	2.35
@satoshifund	0.97	0.35	2.78	329	130	2.53	21	3.61
@au1nethyb1	0.78	0.43	1.84	417	209	2.00	11	1.81
@silver	0.71	0.19	3.76	1403	763	1.84	15	2.13
@badassmother	0.69	0.26	2.68	662	237	2.79	16	2.83
@donkeypong	0.47	0.25	1.90	481	286	1.68	15	2.02
@joseph	0.45	0.19	2.37	374	155	2.41	30	3.63
@xeroc	0.35	0.18	1.93	478	240	1.99	45	3.48
@rossco99	0.30	0.15	1.99	210	119	1.76	13	1.56
@justin	0.25	0.07	3.60	1097	774	1.42	14	1.50
@clayop	0.25	0.56	0.44	209	78	2.67	27	4.53
@slowwalker	0.24	0.08	3.19	895	437	2.05	28	3.61
@cass	0.21	0.10	2.04	454	219	2.07	20	2.53
@boatymcboatface	0.20	0.06	3.44	185	111	1.67	11	1.37
@james212	0.20	0.09	2.20	570	231	2.47	29	4.21
@steempower	0.19	0.12	1.66	495	215	2.30	37	3.62
@onceuponatime	0.19	0.28	0.68	380	198	1.92	43	3.88
@sean-king	0.16	0.13	1.22	399	228	1.75	32	2.68
@dollarvigilante	0.16	0.07	2.29	622	239	2.60	46	4.23
@steemservices	0.16	0.05	3.13	921	780	1.18	14	2.66
@stellabelle	0.15	0.21	0.74	477	243	1.96	44	4.27
@renohq	0.14	0.13	1.07	270	113	2.39	15	2.51
@anwenbaumeister	0.13	0.07	1.79	771	425	1.82	28	2.40
@toxic	0.13	0.05	2.40	173	107	1.62	12	1.48
@kevinwong	0.13	0.06	2.20	973	472	2.06	42	3.08
@steemychicken1	0.12	0.15	0.81	259	149	1.74	19	2.63
@the-alien	0.11	0.04	2.54	247	248	1.00	8	0.77
@steemrollin	0.11	0.07	1.51	332	231	1.44	14	1.81
@inboundinken	0.10	0.03	2.96	539	257	2.10	20	2.20
@liondani	0.10	0.09	1.11	594	292	2.03	60	4.44

3. Village Builders

While this group has a significant influence on payout, they votes for small groups of writers repeatedly, probably due to build their own communities (they have very high Max and StDev). A good example is @abit and @boombastic who support the Chinese community. They have relatively high possibility to be developed into their own DCGs suggested by @ned

Account	Influence	Power	IPR	N	Range	Mean	Max	StDev
@smooth	13.19	2.86	4.62	791	343	2.31	65	7.50
@steemed	4.07	1.60	2.54	298	80	3.72	45	6.54
@itsascam	3.94	1.53	2.57	297	79	3.76	45	6.60
@smooth.witness	2.29	0.53	4.30	782	327	2.39	65	7.63
@steempty	1.28	0.70	1.84	478	165	2.90	34	4.83
@kushed	1.17	0.50	2.34	657	251	2.62	85	7.40
@xeldal	1.15	0.65	1.78	597	204	2.92	48	5.65
@enki	0.91	0.53	1.72	560	174	3.22	46	5.58
@steemroller	0.46	0.18	2.57	295	73	4.04	44	6.69
@abit	0.45	0.64	0.71	783	201	3.90	60	7.48
@cyber	0.43	0.11	4.02	2058	450	4.57	66	8.08
@boombastic	0.33	0.10	3.41	870	261	3.33	44	5.71
@anonymous	0.32	0.13	2.43	937	685	1.37	114	5.50
@nanzo-scoop	0.29	0.07	4.14	859	196	4.38	57	7.23
@eeks	0.24	0.07	3.51	1064	231	4.61	43	5.85
@barrie	0.23	0.06	3.63	832	220	3.78	44	6.02
@tuck-fheman	0.20	0.11	1.91	953	350	2.72	76	5.99
@juneaugoldbuyer	0.18	0.06	2.99	1230	303	4.06	54	6.42
@gavvet	0.18	0.11	1.66	687	274	2.51	50	6.18
@ihashfury	0.16	0.10	1.57	848	203	4.18	55	7.75
@benjojo	0.14	0.13	1.06	870	233	3.73	28	5.44
@mummyimperfect	0.11	0.02	5.35	621	154	4.03	45	6.16
@nabilov	0.11	0.03	3.27	1098	545	2.01	211	9.11

4. Superhumans

They are possibly bots. They have very high N on average (1410.57) and the highest IPR (3.90). They may have very high curation rewards profitability.

Account	Influence	Power	IPR	N	Range	Mean	Max	StDev
@wang	1.93	0.66	2.91	1778	213	8.35	82	10.51
@recursive	1.60	0.31	5.22	1198	123	9.74	51	11.81
@hr1	1.02	0.21	4.80	1086	104	10.44	52	12.00
@jl777	0.19	0.05	3.90	2434	393	6.19	78	9.80
@recursive2	0.18	0.04	4.07	1173	102	11.50	80	13.88
@taoteh1221	0.18	0.04	4.67	1010	116	8.71	67	11.57
@recursive3	0.17	0.04	3.99	1195	101	11.83	80	14.98

Conclusion

Curation is a very important task in Steemit. More understanding of curation will provide constructive foundations for further growth of Steemit.

#steemstats #steem #steemit

8 years ago in #stats by clayop (73)

$794.88

Sort:

Trending

[-]

everythink (58) 8 years ago (edited)

Really cool statistics, thanks!
As we can see Lazy Lions group has the best Avr_Mean of 0.97. So, basically they are the best curators in terms of fair reward distribution among multiple authors. The upcoming changing in SP spending mechanism will harm this group less than others (especially bots) and that's really cool. All the minnows will feel their x8 power too eventually.

$0.56

2 votes

[-]

clayop (73) 8 years ago

Yes, I will post the changes after the next hardfork.

$0.00

1 vote

[-]

carlidos (61) 8 years ago

wait so our voting power will increase as well?

$0.00

1 vote

[-]

serejandmyself (70) 8 years ago

I think I would love to see such analysis for users who have between 5000 - 25000 SP

$0.02

1 vote

[-]

intelliguy (68) 8 years ago

This is a lot of data, and is interesting. Some how it de-humanizes steemit, which is troublesome for me. I know the saying "don't shoot the messenger".

When we splice apart technical data from human curation, I think we're on a bad path, and hopefully this won't be a sign of things to come.

At the end of the day, all of steemit is human interaction, and that includes if there are people behind bots or aliases.

If this is a technological war, I feel that humans will always win in the end. Ever see the movie irobot? (probably). There is a lot of thought and lessons in that movie.

Steemit will never be over-run by irobots in the end. So while you are labelling groups with similarities... this is probably identifying the short-term attributes. It won't last is my prediction. Real thought, by real people, and real participation, by real curators will bleed through all these statistics in the long term.

I hope you are hoping for what I hope for.. because if what I said is true, steemit will win in the long run.

$0.00

1 vote

[-]

futurefood (63) 8 years ago

I get your point, however I don't see this post the way you describe it in your comment. In my opinion this is just a very good insight (objectively or not) in how it currently goes down.

I'm not a big fan of "numbers don't lie" hence I totaly agree with your comment but at the same time I have to mention that I see it as a potential wakeup call.

$0.00

[-]

intelliguy (68) 8 years ago

My comment would have made more sense (I now see), if I had quoted the particular section:

Superhumans: They are possibly bots. [...] They may have very high curation rewards profitability.

$0.00

[-]

warrensteem (65) 8 years ago

This is awesome, thanks @clayop

$0.00

1 vote

[-]

reaction (57) 8 years ago

$0.00

3 votes

[-]

cryptobiker (42) 8 years ago

Looks like I'm fucked, because I'm just a "reader". ^_^

$0.00

1 vote

[-]

steempowerwhale (59) 8 years ago

Very helpful. Thanks for doing the stats. Village builders I compare with those YouTube Channel builders who create and build youtube stars like a music promoter/label does.

@steempowerwhale 🐳
🌞 upvoting your lifetime dreams!

$0.00

[-]

alexgr (66) 8 years ago (edited)

Recursive is definitely not a bot (he participates in conversations), although I don't know if he uses automated ways for his curation.

edit: For curation performance check this out: https://steemit.com/stats/@furion/a-quick-look-at-the-top-curators-and-their-rewards

Recursive around 30%, wang around 24%, hr1 38%.

$0.00

[-]

clayop (73) 8 years ago

Possibly both. I found that recursive is mirroring hr1.

$0.00

[-]

mammasitta (70) 8 years ago

Thanks so much for this excellent detailed info

$0.00

[-]

sizil (41) 8 years ago

Awesome stuff....thanks for the details and the efforts that you have put in.

$0.00

[-]

btcbtcbtc20155 (56) 8 years ago

Steemit is more complex to get ahead. Only with the right PR and marketing strategy will do great.

$0.00

[-]

mindhunter (72) 8 years ago

Excellent stats well presented - may the $'s floweth ;)

$0.00

[-]

merej99 (70) 8 years ago

WOW, you put a lot of work into this and it is greatly appreciated.
Somehow I've gotten on the radar of a few people in the hidden gems curator category but I don't know what I've done differently from day one. Getting into their head to see what they're looking for might help struggling content creators gear their writing toward catering to them. As for me, well, I'm just going to write because I love it and thankful for the attention that I've been getting. :)

$0.00

[-]

razvanelulmarin (72) 8 years ago

really cool :)

$0.00

[-]

futurefood (63) 8 years ago

I'm not a mathematical person but I really appreciate the effort you put into this. Even besides the numbers and details it still provides a good insight into how it's going down atm.

It's these types of posts that make the current debate about Steemit more accessible.

Keep it up!

$0.00

[-]

ziogio (52) 8 years ago

Thank you for the awesome report. I know some of them but I miss some informations about others. I'm going to check out their profiles :)

$0.00

[-]

bonitaxm (35) 8 years ago

Interesting those findings. 4 clusters of data and the labeling of each group help us to understand each curator data set better. Thanks!

$0.00

[-]

freebornangel (72) 8 years ago

Good job!

$0.00

[-]

linkback-bot-v0 (54) 8 years ago

This post has been linked to from another place on Steem.

Learn more about linkback bot v0.3

Upvote if you want the bot to continue posting linkbacks for your posts. Flag if otherwise. Built by @ontofractal

$0.00