Lillian Tey

MATHEMATICS
C

MATRICES

1 ROUND-ROBIN BOWLING TOURNAMENT

a.

Represent this information as a diagraph.

b.

Represent this information as a dominance matrix called D. Use the order of names in the first sentence.

defeats
J
A
D=
M
D
S

J
0
1
0
1
0

A
0
0
1
1
1

M
1
0
0
0
1

D
0
0
1
0
0

S
1
0
0
1
0

*Note that the leading diagonal is zero as players cannot win against themselves.
c.

Calculate the Dominance Vector V. Explain the rank order of the competitors so far. Can you be sure of a definite rank order?
Dominance Vector:

[ ] []

0+0+1+0+ 1
1+0+ 0+0+0
V D = 0+1+0+1+0
1+ 1+ 0+0+1
0+1+1+0+0

2
1
2
3
2

From the dominance vector, it is evident that: David is in first place with 3 points, Juliet, Mat and Sam are tied for fourth with 2 points,
and Anne is in last place with 1 point.
This can be represented as:

{}
J

{ D} M { A }
S

Based on the evidence above, it can be said that the Dominance Vector does not give a definite rank order as 3 of the competitors are
ranked equally. The competitors must be distinguished between in order to establish a rank order between all of them.
d.

Find D + D2. Find a new Dominance vector based on D + D2 and explain the rank order of the competitors and why it also fails to
yield a definite rank order.

[ ][ ]
[ ] [ ][ ]
[ ][ ]
[ ]
[ ][]

0
1
D+ D 2= 0
1
0

0
0
1
1
1

1
0
0
0
1

0
0
1
0
0

1 0 0
0 1 0
0 +0 1
1 1 1
0 0 1

0
1
2
D+ D = 0
1
0

0
0
1
1
1

1
0
0
0
1

0
0
1
0
0

0
0
1
1
1

1
0
0
0
1

0
1
2
D+ D = 2
2
1

2
0
2
2
2

0
1
D+ D 2= 0
1
0

1
0
0
0
1

0
0
1
0
0

1
0
0
1
0

1 0 0
0 1 0
0 +0 1
1 1 1
0 0 1

1
0
0
0
1

0
0
1
0
0

0
0
1
0
0

1 0 2 1
0 0 0 1
0 +2 1 0
1 1 1 2
0 1 1 0

1
0
0
0
1

0
1
1
1
0

2
1
0
2
1

1
0
1
0
1

1
0
0
1
0

0
1
0
1
0

0
0
1
1
1

1
0
0
0
1

0
0
1
0
0

1
0
0
1
0

1
1
1
2
0

0+2+2+1+1
6
1+ 0+2+0+1
4
V D + D = 2+2+0+1+1 = 6
2+ 2+ 2+ 0+2
8
1+ 2+ 1+ 1+ 0
5
2

It is clear that while the dominance vector creates a more distinguished representation of the ranking of each competitor, it still does
not determine a definite rank order. This is due to the fact that two of the competitors (Juliette and Mat) still have an equal ranking,
and therefore, a distinction must be made between the two. Although this is so, a clear first (David) and fourth (Sam) place has now
been established in this tournament. This is shown below:

{ }

{ D } J {S } { A }
M

e.

Find D + 0.5D2 + 0.3D3 and its associated Dominance Vector. Has the rank been established? Make some suggestions as to what you
could do mathematically to establish a rank order.

[ ] [ ] [ ][ ]

0
1
2
3
D+0.5 D + 0.3 D = 0
1
0

0
0
1
1
1

1
0
0
0
1

0
0
1
0
0

1
0
0 + 0.5
1
0

0
0
2
1
1

2
0
1
1
1

1
1
0
2
0

1
0
0
0
1

0
0 0
1
1 0
1 +0.3 0 1
1
1 1
0
0 1

1
0
0
0
1

0
0
1
0
0

1
0
0
1
0

0
0
2
1
1

2
0
1
1
1

1
1
0
2
0

1
0
0
0
1

0
1
1
1
0

[ ][
][ ]
[
][
]
[
]
[
][ ]

0
1
D+0.5 D2+ 0.3 D3= 0
1
0

0
0
1
1
1

1
0
0
0
1

0
0
1
0
0

1
0
1 0.5 0.5 0
3 2
0
0
0 0.5 0 0.5
0 2
0 + 1 0.5 0
0 0.5 +0.3 1 1
1 0.5 0.5 1
0 0.5
1 3
0 0.5 0.5 0 0.5 0
2 1

0
1 1.5 0.5 1
0.9 0.6
1
0 0.5 0 0.5
0 0.6
2
3
D+0.5 D + 0.3 D = 1 1.5 0
1 0.5 + 0.3 0.3
1.5 1.5 1
0 1.5 0.3 0.9
0.5 1.5 1 0.5 0
0.6 0.3
0.9
1
2
3
D+0.5 D + 0.3 D = 1.3
1.8
1.1

1.6
0.6
1.8
2.4
1.8

1.5
0.8
0.9
1.6
1.3

0.8
0.3
1
0.6
0.5

0.9
1
V D +0.5 D + 0.3D = 1.3
1.8
1.1

1.5
0.8
0.9
1.6
1.3

0.8
0.3
1
0.6
0.5

1.3
6.1
0.5
3.2
1.1 = 6.1
1.8
8.2
0.6
5.3

1.6
0.6
1.8
2.4
1.8

0
1
3
2
1

1
1
0
2
0

1
0
2
1
2

0 0.3 0.3
0.3 0.3 0
0.9 0 0.6
0.6 0.6 0.3
0.3 0 0.6

1.3
0.5
1.1
1.8
0.6

After finding the associated Dominance Vector of D + 0.5D2 + 0.3D3, a definite rank order has again not been yielded as two
competitors both have the same score, as determined previously. The current ranking is as follows:

{ }

{ D } J {S }{ A }
M

In order to mathematically establish a rank order, the fourth-order influence may be investigated. Generally, the influences are
investigated depending on the amount of players, i.e. If there are m players,
applied accordingly to weight the influences; i.e.

M + x M 2+ y M 3

M m1

is investigated. Arbitrary constants are

. In this case, since constants of 0.5 and 0.3 have been

substituted respectively, a constant lower than 0.3 will be applied.

Another suggestion involves subtracting total losses from total wins, determining the initial order rank (r1). This can be determined by
using the formula

M 1M 1

where 1 represents a column matrix of 1s (QSA, 2010). This therefore produces a matrix that

determines whether a competitor has won more than they have lost, or vice versa (Total Wins Total Losses). This method, though,
does not take into account the weighting of the seed. In theory, Anne should be able to defeat anyone who has been defeated by
Juliet, though this is not the case as Anne lost to both Mat and Sam. Although this is so, this allows for more information to be gained
and therefore increases the accuracy of a ranking.

2 AUSTRALIAN WOMENS SOCCER COMPETITION

1.

Use dominance matrices to try to obtain a rank order for the teams using the order: M, Q, F, S, P, W in your matrix. Allocate 2 for a
win, 1 for a draw and 0 for a loss or has not yet played, in your dominance matrices.

defeats M Q F
M
0 0 2
Q
0 0 0
D= F
0 0 0
S
0 0 1
P
2 2 0
W
0 2 2

S P W
2 0 0
2 0 0
1 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 2
0 0 0

[ ] [ ][ ]
[ ][ ]
[ ]
[ ][ ]

0
0
0
2
D+D =
0
2
0

0
0
0
0
2
2

2
0
0
1
0
2

2
2
1
0
0
0

0
0
0
0
0
0

0
0
0
0
2
0

0
0
0
D+D 2=
0
2
0

0
0
0
0
2
2

2
0
0
1
0
2

2
2
1
0
0
0

0
0
0
0
0
0

0
0
0
0
2
0

0
0
0
2
D+ D =
0
2
0

0
0
0
0
6
2

4
2
1
1
8
2

4
2
1
1
8
6

0
0
0
0
0
0

0
0
0
0
2
0

0+0+ 4+ 4+0+ 0
8
0+0+2+2+0+ 0
4
0+0+1+1+0+ 0
2
V D+D =
=
0+0+1+1+0+ 0
2
2+ 6+8+8+ 0+2
26
0+2+2+6+0+ 0
10
2

] [ ][]
0+0+2+2+0+ 0 4
0+ 0+0+2+ 0+0
2
0+0+0+1+ 0+0 1
V D=
=
0+0+1+0+ 0+0 1
2+ 2+ 0+0+ 0+2 6
0+2+2+0+0+ 0 4

0
0
0
0
2
0

0
0
0
0
2
2

2
0
0
1
0
2

2
2
1
0
0
0

0
0
0
0
0
0

0
0
0
0
2
0

0
0
0
0
0
0

0
0
0
0
4
0

2
2
1
0
8
0

2
0
0
1
8
6

0
0
0
0
0
0

0
0
0
0
0
0

0
0
0
0
2
0

0
0
0
0
2
2

2
0
0
1
0
2

2
2
1
0
0
0

0
0
0
0
0
0

0
0
0
0
2
0

[
[ ][
[
[
[
[

0
0
0
D+0.5 D2+ 0.25 D 3=
0
2
0

] [ ]
]
][ ] [
][ ][
]
][ ]

0
0
0
0
2
2

2
0
0
1
0
2

2
2
1
0
0
0

0
0
0
0
0
0

0
0
0
0
2
0

0
0
0
0
2
0

0
0
0
0
2
2

2
0
0
1
0
2

2
2
1
0
0
0

0
0
0
0
0
0

0
0
0
0
2
0

0
0
0
D+0.5 D2+ 0.25 D 3=
0
2
0

0
0
0
0
2
2

2
0
0
1
0
2

2
2
1
0
0
0

0
0
0
0
0
0

0
0
0
0
2
0

0
0
0
D+0.5 D2+ 0.25 D 3=
0
2
0

0
0
0
0
2
2

2
0
0
1
0
2

2
2
1
0
0
0

0
0
0
0
0
0

0
0
0
0
2
0

0
0
0
D+0.5 D2+ 0.25 D 3=
0
2
0

0 4.5 4.5 0 0
0
2
2.5 0 0
0
1 1.25 0 0
0 1.25 1
0 0
6 10
12 0 2
2 3.5
6
0 0

0
0
0
0
0
0

0
0
0
0
4
0

2
2
1
0
8
0

2
0
0
1
8
6

0
0
0
0
0
0

0
0
0
0
0
0

+ 0.5

0+0+ 4.5+ 4.5+0+0

9
0+ 0+2+2.5+0+ 0
4.5
0+0+1+1.25+0+ 0
2.25
V D +0.5 D + 0.25 D =
=
0+0+1.25+1+0+ 0
2.25
2+6+10+12+0+ 2
32
0+ 2+ 3.5+6+0+ 0
11.5
2

0
0
0
0
0
0

0
0
0
0
4
0

2
2
1
0
8
0

2
0
0
1
8
6

0
0
0
0
0
0

0
0
0
0
0
0

0
0
0
0
0
0

0 1
1 0 0
0 1
0 0 0
0 0.5 0 0 0
0 0 0.5 0 0
2 4
4 0 0
0 0
3 0 0

0
0
0
0
0
0

0 1
1 0 0
0 1
0 0 0
0 0.5 0 0 0
0 0 0.5 0 0
2 4
4 0 0
0 0
3 0 0

+ 0.25

+ 0.25

0
0
0
0
0
0

0
0
0
0
0
0

0
0
0
0
0
0

2 2 0
0 2 0
0 1 0
1 0 0
8 16 0
6 0 0

0
0
0
0
0
0

0 0.5 0.5 0 0
0
0
0.5 0 0
0
0
0.25 0 0
0 0.25
0
0 0
0
2
5
0 0
0 1.5
0
0 0

2.

Use the ranking you have calculated to discuss the outcomes of the next three rounds for each game as outlined.
In the first game of round 4, the Wests defeated the Fremantle Stripes. This is predictable due to the fact that the Stripes are currently
tied for last place. In the second game of the 4th round, the Kangaroo Paws defeated the Quokkas. In relation to the ranking, this is
also a predictable result as the Paws are the highest ranking team in comparison to the Quokkas, who happen to be ranked 4 th. In the
Saint Marys vs. Swans game, the same occurrence was repeated as with the previous games; the higher ranking team (in this case,
Saint Marys) defeated the lower ranking team (Swans). In round 5, the Wests drew with Saint Marys. From the ranking determined,
both teams were comparatively even as they had both defeated two other teams in the first three rounds. In the Quokkas vs.
Fremantle Stripes game, the Stripes were again defeated, as predicted from the rankings. The third game of round 5, the Paws
defeated the Swans it was a match between the highest ranking and lowest ranking teams. In round 6, the first game again
represented a higher rank defeating the lower rank, as the Swans lost to the Wests. The Marys defeated the Quokkas in round 6,
showing that again the result was predictable due to the ranking produced from the first three rounds. This was also evident in the
final game of round 6, as the highest ranking team (the Paws) defeated the tied lowest team (Stripes).
Overall, the results of each game were predictable as they were consistent with the results from the first three rounds of the
competition.
The rankings for the next three rounds are outlined below.

defeats M
M
0
Q
0
D 2= F
0
S
0
P
0
W
1

Q F S
2 0 2
0 2 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
2 2 2
0 2 2

P W
0 1
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0

[ ][]
[ ] [ ][ ]
[ ][ ]

0+2+0+ 2+ 0+1 5
0+0+2+0+ 0+0 2
0+ 0+0+0+ 0+0 0
VD =
=
0+ 0+0+0+ 0+0 0
0+2+2+2+0+ 0 6
1+0+2+2+0+ 0 5
2

0
0
0
2
D 2+ D 2 =
0
0
1

2
0
0
0
2
0

0
2
0
0
2
2

2
0
0
0
2
2

0
0
0
0
0
0

1
0
0
0
0
0

0
0
0
2
D 2+ D 2 =
0
0
1

2
0
0
0
2
0

0
2
0
0
2
2

2
0
0
0
2
2

0
0
0
0
0
0

1
0
0
0
0
0

0
0
0
0
0
1

2
0
0
0
2
0

0
2
0
0
2
2

2
0
0
0
2
2

0
0
0
0
0
0

1
0
0
0
0
0

1
0
0
0
0
0

0
0
0
0
0
2

6
0
0
0
4
0

2
0
0
0
0
2

0
0
0
0
0
0

0
0
0
0
0
1

0
0
0
0
0
1

2
0
0
0
2
0

0
2
0
0
2
2

2
0
0
0
2
2

0
0
0
0
0
0

1
0
0
0
0
0

1
0
0
D 2+ D 2 2=
0
0
1

2
0
0
0
2
2

6
2
0
0
6
2

4
0
0
0
2
4

0
0
0
0
0
0

1
0
0
0
0
1

[ ][ ]
[
[ ][
[
[
V D +D
2

1+ 2+ 6+4 +0+1
14
0+0+2+0+ 0+0
2
0+ 0+0+ 0+0+0
0
=
=
0+ 0+0+ 0+0+0
0
0+2+6+2+ 0+0
10
1+ 2+ 2+ 4 +0+1
10

0
0
0
D 2+ 0.5 D22+0.25 D23=
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
0

0
0
0
0
0
2

6
0
0
0
4
0

2
0
0
0
0
2

0
0
0
0
0
0

0
0
0
0
0
1

0
0
0
0
0
1

2
0
0
0
2
0

2
0
0
0
2
0

0
2
0
0
2
2

0
2
0
0
2
2

2
0
0
0
2
2

2
0
0
0
2
2
0
0
0
0
0
0

0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0

1
0
0
0
0
0

] [ ]

] [ ] [ ]
][ ][
]

+ 0.5

1
0
0
0
0
0

0
0
0
0
0
2

6
0
0
0
4
0

2
0
0
0
0
2

0
0
0
0
0
0

0
0
0
0
0
1

+ 0.25

0
0
0
D 2+ 0.5 D22+0.25 D23=
0
0
1

2
0
0
0
2
0

0
2
0
0
2
2

2
0
0
0
2
2

0
0
0
0
0
0

1
0
0
0
0
0

0
0
0
D 2+ 0.5 D22+0.25 D23=
0
0
1

2
0
0
0
2
0

0
2
0
0
2
2

2
0
0
0
2
2

0
0
0
0
0
0

1
0
0
+
0
0
0

+ 0.5

1
0
0
0
0
0

0
0
0
0
0
2

6
0
0
0
4
0

2
0
0
0
0
2

0
0
0
0
0
0

0
0
0
0
0
1

0.5
0
0
0
0
0

0
0
0
0
0
1

3
0
0
0
2
0

1
0
0
0
0
1

0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0.5

+ 0.25

0
0
0
0
0
1

2
0
0
0
0
0

0
0
0
0
0
6

2
0
0
0
0
2

0
0
0
0
0
0

1
0
0
0
0
0

0
0.5 0 0.5 0 0.25
0
0
0
0 0
0
0
0
0
0 0
0
0
0
0
0 0
0
0
0
0
0 0
0
0.25 0 1.5 0.5 0
0

0.5 2.5 3 3.5 0 1.25

0
0
2
0 0
0
0
0
0
0 0
0
D 2+ 0.5 D22+0.25 D23=
0
0
0
0 0
0
0
2
4
2 0
0
1.25 1 3.5 3.5 0
0

V D +0.5 D
2

+0.25 D2

][ ]

0.5+ 2.5+3+3.5+0+ 1.25 10.75

0+ 0+2+0+0+ 0
2
0+ 0+ 0+0+ 0+0
0
=
=
0+ 0+ 0+0+ 0+0
0
0+2+ 4+2+ 0+0
8
1.25+ 1+ 3.5+ 3.5+0+0
9.25

When comparing the two results, it is evident that while the Kangaroo Paws, Fremantle Stripes and the Swans remain in 4 th and tied 6th places
respectively, the three other competing teams positions have changed. Although this is so, in general, the games mirror the rankings in the
way that a higher ranked team will beat a lower ranked team. Also, from both results, it is clear that the Stripes and the Swans remain with the
same ranking due to the fact that they only gain points from tying with each other, and are do not gain points from any other teams. The
ranking is therefore as follows:

{}

{ M } { W } { P } { Q} F
S

3 FUTSAL COMPETITION

defeats CCC
CCC
0
RSHS
0
SC
1
0
W = SSHS
BPSH
0
WPSH
0
MSHS
0
PRSH
0
MPSH
0

lost
CCC
RSHS
SC
SSHS
L=
BPSH
WPSH
MSHS
PRSH
MPSH

[
[

CCC
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
0
1

RSHS SC SSHS BPSH

0
0
0
1
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0

RSHS SC
0
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
0

SSHS BPSH
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
1
1
1
0
1
0

WPSH
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0

][
]

0
0
1
0
2
W =0
0
0
0
0

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0

0
1
0
0
0
1
0
1
0

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0

1
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
0

1
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0

1
1
0
1
1
0
0
0
1

0
0
0
1
0
1
0
0
0

1
0 0 0 0
1
0 0 1 0
0
1 0 0 0
1
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0
0 0 1 0
0
0 0 0 0
0
0 1 1 0
0
0 0 0 0

0
1
0
0
W 2= 0
1
0
1
0

0
0
0
1
0
1
0
0
0

1
0
0
2
0
1
0
1
0

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0

0
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
0

0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0

2
2
1
2
0
0
0
1
0

1
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0

0
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
0

WPSH
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
0

1
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
0

1
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0

MSHS
1
1
0
1
1
0
0
0
1

PRSH
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
0
0

MSHS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0

1
1
0
1
1
0
0
0
1

0
0
0
1
0
1
0
0
0

PRSH
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0

1
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
0

MPSH
1
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
0

MPSH
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0

[
[

][ ]
]
[ ][ ][ ][
[ ]

0
0
0
0
L2 = 1
1
1
0
1

0
0
1
0
1
0
1
0
1

1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0

0
0
0
0
1
1
1
1
1

0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0

0
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
0

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0

0
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0

0
0 0 1 0
0
0 0 0 0
0
0 1 0 0
0
0 0 0 0
0 1 1 0 1
0
1 0 0 1
1
1 1 0 1
0
0 0 0 1
0
1 1 0 1

0
0
1
0
2
L=0
0
2
1
0

1
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0

0
0
0
0
1
1
1
0
1

0
1
2
0
0
0
2
1
0

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0

1
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0

1
0
1
0
1
0
1
0
1

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0

1
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
0

1
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0

1
1
0
1
1
0
0
0
1

0
0
0
1
0
1
0
0
0

1 0 0 1 0
1 1 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
1 0 1 2 0
0+0 0 0 0
0 1 1 1 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 1 0 1 0
0 0 0 0 0

W +W LL
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0

0
1
0
0
0
1
0
1
0

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0

0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0

0
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
0

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0

0
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0

0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0

0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0

2
2
1
2
0
0
0
1
0

1
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0

0 0 0 1 0
0 0 0 0 0
1 0 1 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
01 1 0 1
0 1 0 0 1
0 1 1 0 1
1 0 0 0 1
0 1 1 0 1

0
1
0
0
W +W 2 LL2= 1
0
3
0
1

0
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
0

1 0
0
1
0 3
0
1 1 1 1 3
1 0 2 1 1 1
1
2
0
1
1 3
1 1 1 0
0 1
1
1 1 0
0 0
3 1 3 1 0 0
1
2 2 1 1 1
1 1 1 0
0 1

0
1
1 1
2 1
2
1
1 0
1
0
1 1
0
1
1 0

0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0

0
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
0

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0

0
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0

0 0 1 0 0
0 0 0 0 1
0 1 0 0 2
0 0 0 0 0
00 0 1 0
0 0 0 1 0
1 2 2 1 2
0 1 0 0 1
0 0 0 1 0

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0

1
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0

CCC
RSHS
SC
SSHS
W +W 2 LL2= BPSH
WPSH
MSHS
PRSH
MPSH
V

[]
4
4
5
11
4
2
13
3
4

The ranking is shown as follows:

{ }

{ SSHS } CCC { PRSH } {WPSH } BPSH { SC } { MSHS }

RSHS

MPSH

This shows that a definite ranking has not been established for some of the competing teams (CCC, RSHS, BPSH and MPSH). To solve this, the

W 3L3

three-stage win and loss matrices (

W +W 2 +W 3LL2L3

produce the matrix

0
0
1
0
W 3= 0
0
0
0
0

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0

0
1
0
0
0
1
0
1
0

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0

1
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
0

1
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0

1
1
0
1
1
0
0
0
1

0
0
0
1
0
1
0
0
0

][

are established and added into the initial equation formulated (

W +W 2 LL2

1
0 0 0 0
1
0 0 1 0
0
1 0 0 0
1
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0
0 0 1 0
0
0 0 0 0
0
0 1 1 0
0
0 0 0 0

1
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
0

1
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0

1
1
0
1
1
0
0
0
1

0
0
0
1
0
1
0
0
0

][

1
0 0 0 0
1
0 0 1 0
0
1 0 0 0
1
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0
0 0 1 0
0
0 0 0 0
0
0 1 1 0
0
0 0 0 0

1
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
0

1
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0

1
1
0
1
1
0
0
0
1

0
0
0
1
0
1
0
0
0

1
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
0

W +W 2 +W 3LL2L3

Through the Win-Loss method, the ranking of each team has been determined as follows:

For comparative measures, the

second-order rank vector has
been calculated.

Tea
m
CCC
RSH
S
SC
SSH
S
BPS
H
WPS
H
MSH
S
PRS
H
MPS

Plac
e
5
4
6
1
7
3
9
2
8

This therefore shows that the Win-Loss method has been successful and
effective in establishing a prediction of the definite rank order of each of the
teams for the Futsal Competition.
From the predicted rankings, it is almost certain that SSHS will win the
competition as their amount of points is considerably higher than any of the
other teams. While this is so, it is predicted that there will be close competition
between PRSH and WPSH as there is a 1-point margin between the two.
Similarly, the ranking between BPSH and MPSH could be interchangeable as
the competition continues due to their 1-point difference between each of
them. Also, it is clear that MSHS is the most-likely team to be in final place as
the point variance between them and the team in second-last place (BPSH) is
considerably large with a difference of 13 points.

to

Let:

W +W 2 LL2=D1

and

W +W 2 LL2= V 1
V

To calculate the second-order rank vector,

D 1+ D12=D2

vector is calculated (the second-order rank vector (

[
[
[

V 2

is first calculated and

D2

is then substituted into

D 1+ D 2

where the

).

][
][

0
1
0
0
2
D 1+ D1 = 1
0
3
0
1

1 0
0
1
0 3
0
1 1 1 1 3
1 0 2 1 1 1
1
2
0
1
1 3
1 1 1 0
0 1
1
1 1 0
0 0
3 1 3 1 0 0
1
2 2 1 1 1
1 1 1 0
0 1

0
1
0
1 1
1
2 1
0
2
1
0
1 0 + 1
1
0
0
1 1 3
0
1
0
1 0
1

0
1
0
0
D 1+ D12= 1
0
3
0
1

1 0
0
1
0 3
0
1 1 1 1 3
1 0 2 1 1 1
1
2
0
1
1 3
1 1 1 0
0 1
1
1 1 0
0 0
3 1 3 1 0 0
1
2 2 1 1 1
1 1 1 0
0 1

0
1
12
1 1
11
2 1
4
2
1
10
1 0 + 4
1
0
1
1 1
1
0
1
4
1 0
4

1 0
0
1
0 3
0
1 1 1 1 3
1 0 2 1 1 1
1
2
0
1
1 3
1 1 1 0
0 1
1
1 1 0
0 0
3 1 3 1 0 0
1
2 2 1 1 1
1 1 1 0
0 1

0
1
1 1
2 1
2
1
1 0
1
0
1 1
0
1
1 0

11 6 10 4
1 1 4 4
16 10 10 3 1 2
10 5
8 11
3
6
1 11 5 6
10
1 21
2 5
9
9 2
3 6
2
6
2 11
0
4
1
1
5
2 4 2
5
0
2
9
9 11 2 31
1
9
10 7 9
0 5
1
13 4
3 6
2
6
2 11
0
4

12 12 6 10 3
1
2
4 3
10 16 9 11 2 2
5 11 4
4 9 11
1
5
0 10 7 7
10 9
3
21
3 4 12 7 1
D1+ D12= 5 4 7
1
6
2 10 1 4 =D 2
1
0
2
6
2 4
2
4
0
4 1 10 6
12 2 31 0 10
4 9 5 11
1 6
2 13 3
5 4 7
1
6
2 10 1 4

0
1
0
0
D 1+ D2= 1
0
3
0
1

1 0
0
1
0 3
0
1 1 1 1 3
1 0 2 1 1 1
1
2
0
1
1 3
1 1 1 0
0 1
1
1 1 0
0 0
3 1 3 1 0 0
1
2 2 1 1 1
1 1 1 0
0 1

0
1
1 1
2 1
2
1
1 0
1
0
1 1
0
1
1 0

12 12 6 10 3
1
2
4 3
10 16 9 11 2 2
5
11 4
4 9 11
1
5
0 10 7 7
10 9
3 21
3 4 12 7 1
5 4 7
1
6
2 10 1 4
1
0
2
6
2 4
2
4
0
4 1 10
6 12 2 31
0 10
4 9 5 11
1
6
2
13 3
5 4 7
1
6
2 10 1 4

[
[]

12 13 6 10 2
1
5
4 2
9 16 8 12 1 3
8
12 3
4 10 11 1 4 1 9 9 8
10 8
5 21 4
3 15 5
0
D 1+ D2= 6 5 8
0
6
2 9 2 4
1
1
3
7
2 4
2
3
0
7 4 11
3 13 2 31 1 11
4 8 3 13 2
7
3 13 2
6 5 8
0
6
2 9 2 4

43
56
57
23
V 2= 38
5
73
45
38

Although the ranking has been broken down even further, two teams still remain with the same score. Due to this, the second-order ranking
vector is then weighted by an arbitrary constant of 0.5 and if this does not determine a definite ranking, the third-order ranking vector is then
found.

0
1
0
0
D1+ 0.5 D2= 1
0
3
0
1

1 0
0
1
0 3
0
1 1 1 1 3
1 0 2 1 1 1
1
2
0
1
1 3
1 1 1 0
0 1
1
1 1 0
0 0
3 1 3 1 0 0
1
2 2 1 1 1
1 1 1 0
0 1

0
1
1 1
2 1
2
1
1 0
1
0
1 1
0
1
1 0

12 12 6 10 3
1
2
4 3
10 16 9 11 2 2
5 11 4
4 9 11
1
5
0 10 7 7
10 9
3
21
3 4 12 7 1
0.5 5 4 7
1
6
2 10 1 4
1
0
2
6
2 4
2
4
0
4 1 10
6 12 2 31
0 10
4 9 5 11
1 6
2 13 3
5 4 7
1
6
2 10 1 4

6 6.5 3
5
1
0.5
2.5
2
1
4.5 8
4
6 0.5 1.5
4
6 1.5
2
5 5.5 0.5 2 0.5 4.5 4.5 4
5
4
2.5 10.5
2
1.5
7.5 2.5
0
D 1+ 0.5 D2= 3 2.5 4
0
3
1
4.5 1
2
0.5
0.5
1.5 3.5
1
2
1
1.5
0
3.5 2 5.5
1.5 6.5
1
15.5 0.5 5.5
2
4 1.5 6.5
1
3.5
1.5 6.5 1
3 2.5 4
0
3
1
4.5 1
2

V3

[]

21.5
28
28.5
11.5
V 3= 19
2.5
36.5
22.5
19

As shown above, the weighting of the second-order ranking vector was insufficient in providing a definite rank order for the Futsal Competition
and therefore, to continue the
2

D 1+ D1 + D1 =D 3

substituted into:

D 1+ D 2+ D 3
D 3=D1 + D12+ D 13

0
1
0
0
D 3= 1
0
3
0
1

1 0
0
1
0 3
0
1 1 1 1 3
1 0 2 1 1 1
1
2
0
1
1 3
1 1 1 0
0 1
1
1 1 0
0 0
3 1 3 1 0 0
1
2 2 1 1 1
1 1 1 0
0 1

][

0
1
0 1 0
1 1
1
0
1
2 1
0 1 0
2
1
0
1
2
+
1 0
1 1 1
1
0
0
1
1
1 1 3 3 1
0
1
0
1
2
1 0
1 1 1

0
1
0 3
1 1 1 3
2 1 1 1
0
1
1 3
1 0
0 1
1 0
0 0
3 1 0 0
2 1 1 1
1 0
0 1

][
2

0
1
0 1 0
1 1
1
0
1
2 1
0 1 0
2
1
0
1
2
+
1 0
1 1 1
1
0
0
1
1
1 1
3 3 1
0
1
0
1
2
1 0
1 1 1

0
1
2
0
1
1
3
2
1

It is evident that through this process, the Win-Loss method is

comparatively more effective as is able to determine a definite
ranking, as opposed to the order method shown here, which fails to
yield a definite rank order as two teams maintain the exact same
score in each calculation of first-order, second-order, and third-order
ranking vectors.
The fact that even after determining the third-order vector, the
definite ranking has not been determined, reflects that each of the
teams, especially in the middle-placings, will be facing great
competition for each game they play.
Overall, the Win-Loss method is quite successful in determining a
prediction for the ranking of each of the teams in the competition,
and it allows for an accurate representation of the current state of

0
1
0
0
D 3= 1
0
3
0
1

1 0
0
1
0 3
0
1 1 1 1 3
1 0 2 1 1 1
1
2
0
1
1 3
1 1 1 0
0 1
1
1 1 0
0 0
3 1 3 1 0 0
1
2 2 1 1 1
1 1 1 0
0 1

][

0
1
12
1 1
11
2 1
4
2
1
10
1 0 + 4
1
0
1
1 1
1
0
1
4
1 0
4

][

11 6 10 4 1
1 4 4
0
16
16 10 10 3 1
2 10 5 14
2
8 11
3
6 1 11 5 6
37
59
10 1 21
2 5
9
9 2 37 53
3 6
2
6 2 11
0 4 + 40
57
1
1
5
2 4
2
5
0
9 24
2
9
9 11 2 31
1 9
115 135
10 7 9
0 5
1 13 4
9 15
3 6
2
6 2 11
0 4
40
57

[
[

0
1
0
0
D 1+ D2+ D 3= 1
0
3
0
1

24
33
29
57
D 1+ D2+ D 3= 29
7
104
17
29

1 0
0
1
0 3
0
1 1 1 1 3
1 0 2 1 1 1
1
2
0
1
1 3
1 1 1 0
0 1
1
1 1 0
0 0
3 1 3 1 0 0
1
2 2 1 1 1
1 1 1 0
0 1

9
30
40
70
48
23
130
32
48

][

][

0
1
12 12 6 10 3
1
2
4 3

1 1
10 16 9 11 2 2
5
11 4

2 1
4 9 11
1
5
0 10 7 7
2
1
10 9
3 21
3 4 12 7 1

1 0 + 5 4 7
1
6
2 10 1 4 +
1
0
1
0
2
6
2 4
2
4
0

1 1
4 1 10 6 12 2 31
0
10
1
0
1
4 9 5 11
1
6
2 13 3

1 0
5 4 7
1
6
2 10 1 4

41 21 47 13 110
5
35
68 36 62 21 126 2 46
10 84 23 26
74
44
7
76 38 51 10 104 60 61
9
57 12 15
50
39
4
24 8 7 8 13 26 13
54 134
8
19
60
86
30
64 32 41
8
88 22 35
9
57 12 15
50
39
4

[]

227
310
509
527
V 4 = 139
129
505
259
139

References/Resources:
References:
1.
Dominance Matrices. (2008). Retrieved May 11, 2016, from https://www.qcaa.qld.edu.au/downloads/senior/snr_maths_c_08_sai_modelling.pdf
Resources used:

1.

Math Quest Math C Year 11 For Queensland - Simpson