你需要一种算法来衡量一个话题的传播速度——换句话说，如果你把它画出来，你想要显示那些以惊人的速度增长的话题。

这是趋势线的一阶导数，将其作为整体计算的加权因素并不难。

正常化

One technique you'll need to do is to normalize all your data. For each topic you are following, keep a very low pass filter that defines that topic's baseline. Now every data point that comes in about that topic should be normalized - subtract its baseline and you'll get ALL of your topics near 0, with spikes above and below the line. You may instead want to divide the signal by its baseline magnitude, which will bring the signal to around 1.0 - this not only brings all signals in line with each other (normalizes the baseline), but also normalizes the spikes. A britney spike is going to be magnitudes larger than someone else's spike, but that doesn't mean you should pay attention to it - the spike may be very small relative to her baseline.

推导出

一旦你标准化了所有的东西，计算出每个主题的斜率。取两个连续的点，测量差值。正的差异呈上升趋势，负的差异呈下降趋势。然后你可以比较归一化的差异，并找出哪些主题与其他主题相比受欢迎程度上升-每个主题都适用于它自己的“正常”，这可能是与其他主题不同的量级。

这确实是解决这个问题的第一步。您还需要使用更高级的技术(主要是上述算法与其他算法的组合，根据您的需要进行加权)，但这应该足以让您开始学习。

关于文章

The article is about topic trending, but it's not about how to calculate what's hot and what's not, it's about how to process the huge amount of information that such an algorithm must process at places like Lycos and Google. The space and time required to give each topic a counter, and find each topic's counter when a search on it goes through is huge. This article is about the challenges one faces when attempting such a task. It does mention the Brittney effect, but it doesn't talk about how to overcome it.

正如Nixuz指出的，这也被称为Z或标准分数。

您可以使用对数概率比来比较当前日期与上个月或去年。这在统计上是合理的(假设你的事件不是正态分布，这是从你的问题中假设的)。

只需按logLR排序所有的术语，并选择前10名。

public static void main(String... args) {
    TermBag today = ...
    TermBag lastYear = ...
    for (String each: today.allTerms()) {
        System.out.println(logLikelihoodRatio(today, lastYear, each) + "\t" + each);
    }
} 

public static double logLikelihoodRatio(TermBag t1, TermBag t2, String term) {
    double k1 = t1.occurrences(term); 
    double k2 = t2.occurrences(term); 
    double n1 = t1.size(); 
    double n2 = t2.size(); 
    double p1 = k1 / n1;
    double p2 = k2 / n2;
    double p = (k1 + k2) / (n1 + n2);
    double logLR = 2*(logL(p1,k1,n1) + logL(p2,k2,n2) - logL(p,k1,n1) - logL(p,k2,n2));
    if (p1 < p2) logLR *= -1;
    return logLR;
}

private static double logL(double p, double k, double n) {
    return (k == 0 ? 0 : k * Math.log(p)) + ((n - k) == 0 ? 0 : (n - k) * Math.log(1 - p));
}

PS, TermBag是单词的无序集合。为每个文档创建一袋术语。数一下单词的出现次数。然后，occurrences方法返回给定单词的出现次数，size方法返回单词的总数。最好以某种方式规范化单词，通常toLowerCase就足够了。当然，在上面的示例中，您将创建一个包含当前所有查询的文档，以及一个包含去年所有查询的文档。

我们的想法是跟踪这些东西，并注意到它们什么时候比自己的基线跳得明显。

因此，对于具有超过某个阈值的查询，跟踪每个查询，当它更改为其历史值的某个值时(例如几乎是其历史值的两倍)，那么它将成为一个新的热门趋势。

你需要一种算法来衡量一个话题的传播速度——换句话说，如果你把它画出来，你想要显示那些以惊人的速度增长的话题。

这是趋势线的一阶导数，将其作为整体计算的加权因素并不难。

正常化

One technique you'll need to do is to normalize all your data. For each topic you are following, keep a very low pass filter that defines that topic's baseline. Now every data point that comes in about that topic should be normalized - subtract its baseline and you'll get ALL of your topics near 0, with spikes above and below the line. You may instead want to divide the signal by its baseline magnitude, which will bring the signal to around 1.0 - this not only brings all signals in line with each other (normalizes the baseline), but also normalizes the spikes. A britney spike is going to be magnitudes larger than someone else's spike, but that doesn't mean you should pay attention to it - the spike may be very small relative to her baseline.

推导出

一旦你标准化了所有的东西，计算出每个主题的斜率。取两个连续的点，测量差值。正的差异呈上升趋势，负的差异呈下降趋势。然后你可以比较归一化的差异，并找出哪些主题与其他主题相比受欢迎程度上升-每个主题都适用于它自己的“正常”，这可能是与其他主题不同的量级。

这确实是解决这个问题的第一步。您还需要使用更高级的技术(主要是上述算法与其他算法的组合，根据您的需要进行加权)，但这应该足以让您开始学习。

关于文章

The article is about topic trending, but it's not about how to calculate what's hot and what's not, it's about how to process the huge amount of information that such an algorithm must process at places like Lycos and Google. The space and time required to give each topic a counter, and find each topic's counter when a search on it goes through is huge. This article is about the challenges one faces when attempting such a task. It does mention the Brittney effect, but it doesn't talk about how to overcome it.

正如Nixuz指出的，这也被称为Z或标准分数。

通常情况下，“嗡嗡声”是通过某种形式的指数/对数衰减机制计算出来的。有关Hacker News、Reddit和其他网站如何简单处理这个问题的概述，请参阅这篇文章。

这并没有完全解决总是受欢迎的事情。你要找的似乎是谷歌的“热门趋势”功能。为此，您可以将当前值除以历史值，然后减去低于某个噪声阈值的值。

这个问题需要一个z分数或标准分数，它会考虑历史平均值，就像其他人提到的，但也会考虑历史数据的标准差，这使得它比仅仅使用平均值更可靠。

在你的例子中，z分数是通过以下公式计算的，其中趋势是一个比率，如观看次数/天。

z-score = ([current trend] - [average historic trends]) / [standard deviation of historic trends]

当使用z分数时，z分数越高或越低，趋势就越不正常，例如，如果z分数高度正，那么趋势就会异常上升，而如果z分数高度负，则趋势就会异常下降。因此，一旦你计算出所有候选趋势的z分数，最高的10个z分数将与最不正常增长的z分数有关。

有关z分数的更多信息，请参阅维基百科。

Code

from math import sqrt

def zscore(obs, pop):
    # Size of population.
    number = float(len(pop))
    # Average population value.
    avg = sum(pop) / number
    # Standard deviation of population.
    std = sqrt(sum(((c - avg) ** 2) for c in pop) / number)
    # Zscore Calculation.
    return (obs - avg) / std

样例输出

>>> zscore(12, [2, 4, 4, 4, 5, 5, 7, 9])
3.5
>>> zscore(20, [21, 22, 19, 18, 17, 22, 20, 20])
0.0739221270955
>>> zscore(20, [21, 22, 19, 18, 17, 22, 20, 20, 1, 2, 3, 1, 2, 1, 0, 1])
1.00303599234
>>> zscore(2, [21, 22, 19, 18, 17, 22, 20, 20, 1, 2, 3, 1, 2, 1, 0, 1])
-0.922793112954
>>> zscore(9, [1, 2, 0, 3, 1, 3, 1, 2, 9, 8, 7, 10, 9, 5, 2, 4, 1, 1, 0])
1.65291949506

笔记

You can use this method with a sliding window (i.e. last 30 days) if you wish not to take to much history into account, which will make short term trends more pronounced and can cut down on the processing time. You could also use a z-score for values such as change in views from one day to next day to locate the abnormal values for increasing/decreasing views per day. This is like using the slope or derivative of the views per day graph. If you keep track of the current size of the population, the current total of the population, and the current total of x^2 of the population, you don't need to recalculate these values, only update them and hence you only need to keep these values for the history, not each data value. The following code demonstrates this. from math import sqrt class zscore: def __init__(self, pop = []): self.number = float(len(pop)) self.total = sum(pop) self.sqrTotal = sum(x ** 2 for x in pop) def update(self, value): self.number += 1.0 self.total += value self.sqrTotal += value ** 2 def avg(self): return self.total / self.number def std(self): return sqrt((self.sqrTotal / self.number) - self.avg() ** 2) def score(self, obs): return (obs - self.avg()) / self.std() Using this method your work flow would be as follows. For each topic, tag, or page create a floating point field, for the total number of days, sum of views, and sum of views squared in your database. If you have historic data, initialize these fields using that data, otherwise initialize to zero. At the end of each day, calculate the z-score using the day's number of views against the historic data stored in the three database fields. The topics, tags, or pages, with the highest X z-scores are your X "hotest trends" of the day. Finally update each of the 3 fields with the day's value and repeat the process next day.

新成员

Normal z-scores as discussed above do not take into account the order of the data and hence the z-score for an observation of '1' or '9' would have the same magnitude against the sequence [1, 1, 1, 1, 9, 9, 9, 9]. Obviously for trend finding, the most current data should have more weight than older data and hence we want the '1' observation to have a larger magnitude score than the '9' observation. In order to achieve this I propose a floating average z-score. It should be clear that this method is NOT guaranteed to be statistically sound but should be useful for trend finding or similar. The main difference between the standard z-score and the floating average z-score is the use of a floating average to calculate the average population value and the average population value squared. See code for details:

Code

class fazscore:
    def __init__(self, decay, pop = []):
        self.sqrAvg = self.avg = 0
        # The rate at which the historic data's effect will diminish.
        self.decay = decay
        for x in pop: self.update(x)
    def update(self, value):
        # Set initial averages to the first value in the sequence.
        if self.avg == 0 and self.sqrAvg == 0:
            self.avg = float(value)
            self.sqrAvg = float((value ** 2))
        # Calculate the average of the rest of the values using a 
        # floating average.
        else:
            self.avg = self.avg * self.decay + value * (1 - self.decay)
            self.sqrAvg = self.sqrAvg * self.decay + (value ** 2) * (1 - self.decay)
        return self
    def std(self):
        # Somewhat ad-hoc standard deviation calculation.
        return sqrt(self.sqrAvg - self.avg ** 2)
    def score(self, obs):
        if self.std() == 0: return (obs - self.avg) * float("infinity")
        else: return (obs - self.avg) / self.std()

样例输入输出

>>> fazscore(0.8, [1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 9, 9, 9, 9, 9, 9]).score(1)
-1.67770595327
>>> fazscore(0.8, [1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 9, 9, 9, 9, 9, 9]).score(9)
0.596052006642
>>> fazscore(0.9, [2, 4, 4, 4, 5, 5, 7, 9]).score(12)
3.46442230724
>>> fazscore(0.9, [2, 4, 4, 4, 5, 5, 7, 9]).score(22)
7.7773245459
>>> fazscore(0.9, [21, 22, 19, 18, 17, 22, 20, 20]).score(20)
-0.24633160155
>>> fazscore(0.9, [21, 22, 19, 18, 17, 22, 20, 20, 1, 2, 3, 1, 2, 1, 0, 1]).score(20)
1.1069362749
>>> fazscore(0.9, [21, 22, 19, 18, 17, 22, 20, 20, 1, 2, 3, 1, 2, 1, 0, 1]).score(2)
-0.786764452966
>>> fazscore(0.9, [1, 2, 0, 3, 1, 3, 1, 2, 9, 8, 7, 10, 9, 5, 2, 4, 1, 1, 0]).score(9)
1.82262469243
>>> fazscore(0.8, [40] * 200).score(1)
-inf

更新

正如David Kemp所正确指出的那样，如果给定一系列常数值，然后要求一个与其他值不同的观测值的zscore，那么结果应该是非零的。事实上，返回的值应该是无穷大。我改变了这条线，

if self.std() == 0: return 0

to:

if self.std() == 0: return (obs - self.avg) * float("infinity")

这一更改反映在fazscore解决方案代码中。如果你不想处理无穷大的值，一个可以接受的解决方案是将这一行改为:

if self.std() == 0: return obs - self.avg