Ranking Sports Teams: A Customizable Quadratic Assignment Approach

References

• Ahuja Ravindra K., Orlin J. B., Tiwari A. A greedy genetic algorithm for the quadratic assignment problem. Comput. Oper. Res. (2000) 27(2):917–934Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ali Iqbal, Cook W. D., Kress M. On the minimum violations ranking of a tournament. Management Sci. (1986) 32(6):660–672Link, Google Scholar
• Anstreicher Kurt M. Recent advances in the solution of quadratic assignment problems. Math. Programming Series B (2003) 97(1–2):27–42Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bassett Gilbert W. Robust sports ratings based on least absolute errors. Amer. Statistician (1997) 51(2):1–7Google Scholar
• Boginski V., Butenko S., Pardalos P. M., Butenko S., Gil-Lafuente J., Pardalos P. M. Matrix-based methods for college football rankings. Economics, Management and Optimization in Sports (2004) (Springer, London, UK) 1–13Crossref, Google Scholar
• Coleman B. J. A proposed multi-objective mixed-integer program for ranking college football teams. Proceedings—Annual Meeting of the Decision Sciences Institute (1996) 2(Decision Sciences Institute, Atlanta, GA) 975Google Scholar
• Drezner Zvi. A new genetic algorithm for the quadratic assignment problem. INFORMS J. Comput. (2003) 15(3):320–330Link, Google Scholar
• Harville David. The use of linear-model technology to rate high school or college football teams. J. Amer. Statist. Assoc. (1977) 72(358):278–289Crossref, Google Scholar
• Goddard S. T. Ranking tournaments and group decision-making. Management Sci. (1983) 29(12):1384–1392Link, Google Scholar
• Jech Thomas. The ranking of incomplete tournaments: A mathematician’s guide to popular sports. Amer. Math. Monthly (1983) 90(4):246–266Crossref, Google Scholar
• Keener James P. The Perron-Frobenius theorem and the ranking of football teams. SIAM Rev. (1993) 35(1):80–93Crossref, Google Scholar
• Knorr-Held Leonhard. Dynamic rating of sports teams. J. Roy. Statist. Soc. Series D—The Statistician (2000) 49(2):261–276Crossref, Google Scholar
• Leake R. J., Ladany S. P., Machol R. E. A method for ranking teams: With an application to college football. Management Science in Sports (1976) (North-Holland, Amsterdam, The Netherlands) 27–46Google Scholar
• Martinich Joseph. College football rankings: Do the computers know best? Interfaces (2002) 32(5):85–94Link, Google Scholar
• Stefani Raymond T. Improved least-squares football, basketball, and soccer predictions. IEEE Trans. Systems, Man, Cybernetics (1980) 11(5):431–447Google Scholar
• Stern Hal S. Who’s number 1 in college football?…and how might we decide? Chance (1995) 8(3):7–14Crossref, Google Scholar
• Stob Michael. Rankings from round-robin tournaments. Management Sci. (1985) 31(9):1191–1195Link, Google Scholar
• Tate David M., Smith A. E. A genetic approach to the quadratic assignment problem. Comput. Oper. Res. (1995) 22(1):73–83Crossref, Google Scholar
• Thompson Mark. On any given Sunday: Fair competitor orderings with maximum likelihood methods. J. Amer. Statist. Assoc. (1975) 70(351):536–541Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wilson Rick L. Ranking college football teams: A neural-network approach. Interfaces (1995a) 25(4):44–59Link, Google Scholar
• Wilson Rick L. The “real” mythical college football champion. OR/MS Today (1995b) 22(5):24–29Google Scholar
• Wilson Rick L. Heuristic approach for the multi-objective college football ranking problem. Proceedings—Annual Meeting of the Decision Sciences Institute (1997) 2(Decision Sciences Institute, Atlanta, GA) 885–887Google Scholar