Three things #38 asked for, on a premise that had half dissolved. The
issue argued from "captured at first appearance", "missing it is silent"
and "missing it is permanent"; 8c087ad made configuration apply whenever
supplied and refit the whole history, so two of those are already gone.
What survived is the literal title — no way to say it before the first
event — plus the absence of any way to check.
`register(Member)` states configuration before anything is observed. It
takes the same `Member` ingestion takes, so there is one vocabulary
rather than two, and it creates the competitor immediately, which is what
makes it observable. It reaches a competitor first seen through
`record_winner`, the route #37 deliberately did not extend.
`rating(&key)` reads back what was stored. Every other accessor reports
what inference inferred; this reports what it was told, which is what
makes a configuration mistake detectable from outside the crate at all.
Conflicting configuration is now an error across batches, not only within
one. The `priors` map is rebuilt per `add_events` call, so a second batch
silently overwrote what a first declared, last-write-wins. That cut
directly against the invariant tests/ingestion_equivalence.rs exists to
protect: the same contradictory events errored when batched and
succeeded, order-dependently, when fed one at a time. Detection lives on
a new `declared` map on `History`, because a `Rating` cannot say whether
a value was chosen or inherited from the defaults — which is exactly the
distinction the check needs. Checked before anything mutates, so a
rejected batch leaves the history untouched.
`register` rejects a non-default `weight` rather than ignoring it. Weight
is per-event and has no meaning on a registration, and silently dropping
a field the caller set is the defect this whole area keeps producing.
The declarative `default_rating_for` closure is not here. It is the
better answer for ustat's actual case — thousands of keys matching a
rule, rather than enumerated — but it adds a `Fn` parameter to `History`,
which the issue itself flags as in tension with the crate's posture. That
wants its own decision rather than riding along.
BREAKING CHANGE: two different values for one competitor's `prior` or
`drift_scale` supplied across separate `add_events` calls now return
`ConflictingCompetitorConfig` instead of silently taking the later one.
Refs #38
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_011hcFjNDmHXZF8URGLku5zZ
TrueSkill - Through Time
Rust port of TrueSkillThroughTime.py.
Other implementations
- ttt-scala
- ChessAnalysis #F
- TrueSkillThroughTime.jl
- TrueSkillThroughTime.R
- TrueSkill Through Time: Revisiting the History of Chess
- TrueSkill Through Time. The full scientific documentation
Drift
Skill drift models how a competitor's true skill can change between appearances. Each time they reappear after a gap, their skill uncertainty is widened by the drift model before the new evidence is incorporated.
Drift is represented by the Drift trait (src/drift.rs), generic over the
history's time type:
pub trait Drift<T: Time>: Copy + Debug + Send + Sync {
fn variance_delta(&self, from: &T, to: &T) -> f64;
fn variance_for_elapsed(&self, elapsed: i64) -> f64;
}
Both methods return the amount to add to σ², not to σ. variance_delta
works from two timestamps; variance_for_elapsed takes an already-computed
elapsed count, and is used on the paths that cache it. Gaussian::forget
applies the result entirely in variance space — from_mv(mu, variance() + variance_delta) — taking no square root.
That block is a quotation rather than a doctest. The custom-drift example below is compiled by CI, so it is what actually pins the signature.
ConstantDrift
The built-in ConstantDrift implements a linear random walk — skill uncertainty
grows proportionally to time:
variance_delta = elapsed * γ²
This is the standard TrueSkill Through Time model. Pass a ConstantDrift(gamma)
when constructing a Rating:
use trueskill_tt::{ConstantDrift, Gaussian, Rating};
// gamma = 0.1 means skill can shift ~0.1 per time unit.
let rating: Rating<i64, ConstantDrift> =
Rating::new(Gaussian::from_ms(0.0, 6.0), 1.0, ConstantDrift(0.1));
assert_eq!(rating.drift().0, 0.1);
The type annotation is load-bearing: ConstantDrift implements Drift<T> for
every T: Time, so without it T is ambiguous.
Custom drift
Implement Drift<T> to express any other model. For example, a drift that
saturates after a long absence, with uncertainty growing as the square root of
elapsed time instead of linearly:
use trueskill_tt::{Drift, Gaussian, History, Rating, Time};
#[derive(Clone, Copy, Debug)]
struct SqrtDrift {
gamma: f64,
}
impl<T: Time> Drift<T> for SqrtDrift {
fn variance_delta(&self, from: &T, to: &T) -> f64 {
let elapsed = from.elapsed_to(to).max(0) as f64;
elapsed.sqrt() * self.gamma * self.gamma
}
fn variance_for_elapsed(&self, elapsed: i64) -> f64 {
(elapsed.max(0) as f64).sqrt() * self.gamma * self.gamma
}
}
// On a single Rating:
let rating: Rating<i64, SqrtDrift> =
Rating::new(Gaussian::from_ms(0.0, 6.0), 1.0, SqrtDrift { gamma: 0.5 });
// Or for a whole History, via the builder:
let history = History::builder().drift(SqrtDrift { gamma: 0.5 }).build();
assert_eq!(rating.beta(), 1.0);
assert_eq!(history.log_evidence(), 0.0);
HistoryBuilder::drift is the only way to set a history's drift model; there is
no gamma() shorthand. The default is ConstantDrift(GAMMA).
Per-competitor drift
A History has one drift model, but individual competitors can scale it.
Member::with_drift_scale(s) multiplies the drift variance that competitor
accumulates, so s is in the same units as gamma: ConstantDrift(g) at
scale s behaves exactly as ConstantDrift(g * s) would, for that competitor
alone.
0.0 pins a competitor still. That is what makes a fixed reference point
expressible in the same graph as moving competitors — a bot at a known
strength, a rating floor, a course difficulty:
use trueskill_tt::{ConstantDrift, Event, History, Member, Outcome, Team};
let mut h = History::builder().drift(ConstantDrift(0.1)).build();
h.add_events(vec![Event {
time: 0,
teams: [
Team::with_members([Member::new("player")]),
// A course does not improve. Pin it, and the round's evidence
// lands on the player instead of being split between the two.
Team::with_members([Member::new("layout_7").with_drift_scale(0.0)]),
]
.into_iter()
.collect(),
outcome: Outcome::winner(0, 2),
}])
.unwrap();
h.converge().unwrap();
Like with_prior, the scale is competitor configuration, not a per-event
value: it applies to the competitor for the whole history, and it applies
whenever it is supplied — including on a key the history already knows.
Configuring one late still refits the whole history rather than taking effect
only from that event onward, because converge refits from competitor state.
Repeating the same value is inert; supplying two different values for one
competitor within a single batch is InferenceError::ConflictingCompetitorConfig,
since events in a batch have no order. The scale must be finite and
non-negative; ingestion otherwise fails with InferenceError::InvalidParameter.
The fluent EventBuilder reaches this too: .team([...]) is the common case
and leaves both unset, while .members([...]) takes Member values directly,
so h.event(t).members([Member::new("layout_7").with_drift_scale(0.0)]) is
equivalent to the typed shape above.
Scored outcomes
Use Outcome::scores([...]) when you have continuous per-team scores rather
than just ranks. Adjacent score margins flow into a MarginFactor that adds
soft Gaussian evidence about the latent performance diff. Configure
HistoryBuilder::score_sigma(σ) to control how much you trust the margins
(smaller σ = more trust).
use trueskill_tt::History;
let mut h = History::builder().score_sigma(2.0).build();
h.event(1)
.team(["alice"])
.team(["bob"])
.scores([21.0, 9.0])
.commit()
.unwrap();
h.converge().unwrap();
Prediction
predict_outcome gives the full distribution over finishing orders. Each entry
is a rank vector in the same shape Outcome::ranking takes — equal ranks mean a
tie — so an outcome feeds straight back into inference.
use trueskill_tt::History;
let mut h = History::builder().p_draw(0.1).build();
h.record_winner(&"alice", &"bob", 1).unwrap();
h.converge().unwrap();
let p = h.predict_outcome(&[&[&"alice"], &[&"bob"]]).unwrap();
// Probabilities are exhaustive and disjoint, so they sum to one.
assert!((p.total() - 1.0).abs() < 1e-6);
let (best, likelihood) = p.most_likely().unwrap();
println!("most likely: {best:?} at {likelihood:.3}");
println!("draw: {:.3}", p.probability_of(&[0, 0]));
Supports any number of teams. Because the outcome space grows factorially, the
full distribution is capped at MAX_PREDICTED_TEAMS; two cheaper entry points
stay available at any size:
predict_win_probabilities(teams)—P(team i finishes strictly first), quadratic in team count.predict_ranking(teams, ranks)— one specific finishing order.
Unknown keys are an error by default, not a silent omission: a team the history
has never seen cannot produce a confident-looking probability. The error names
the key, and every key must already be known — pre-filter with lookup or
current_skill if your caller cannot guarantee that.
If predicting for competitors you have never seen is the point rather than a mistake, say so once:
use trueskill_tt::{History, UnknownKeys};
let h = History::builder().unknown_keys(UnknownKeys::Prior).build();
An unknown competitor is then answered from the configured prior, which is the honest reading — you have no evidence about them — and correctly widens a team that contains one. There is deliberately no "skip the member" mode: a team's performance is the sum of its members, so dropping one would make the model more certain because it knows less.
Asking about one competitor
Gaussian answers tail questions directly, which is what a stopping rule needs:
use trueskill_tt::History;
let mut h = History::builder().build();
h.record_winner(&"alice", &"bob", 1).unwrap();
let _ = h.converge().unwrap();
let skill = h.current_skill(&"alice").unwrap();
// "How sure am I that this is below the cutoff?" — a probability, not a
// `mu + z * sigma` band whose confidence drifts as sigma changes.
let _ = skill.probability_below(20.0);
// Use this rather than `1.0 - probability_below(x)`: the complement cancels
// away every digit in the upper tail, which is where a stopping rule lives.
let _ = skill.probability_above(30.0);
Which match to play next
quality() measures whether a matchup is fair. That is not the same as
whether it is informative, and the two only coincide for two evenly matched
competitors. When each observation costs something, ask
expected_information_gain instead — the outcome-weighted divergence between
what you believe now and what you would believe afterwards.
use trueskill_tt::History;
let mut h = History::builder().build();
for t in 1..=10 {
h.record_winner(&"veteran", &"regular", t).unwrap();
h.record_winner(&"regular", &"veteran", t + 100).unwrap();
}
h.record_winner(&"veteran", &"newcomer", 500).unwrap();
h.converge().unwrap();
let settled = h.expected_information_gain(&[&[&"veteran"], &[&"regular"]]).unwrap();
let unknown = h.expected_information_gain(&[&[&"veteran"], &[&"newcomer"]]).unwrap();
// Playing the newcomer teaches you more than replaying a settled rivalry.
assert!(unknown > settled);
The result is in nats, and is bounded by the entropy of the outcome: at most
ln 2 ≈ 0.693 for a two-way result, ln 3 once draws are possible, ln k for
k outcomes. A value near zero means you already know how it ends.
This costs one full inference pass per possible outcome, so it is far more
expensive than quality(). Scoring every pairing among n competitors is
O(n² × outcomes) passes — shortlist with quality() or
predict_win_probabilities first, then score only the shortlist.
Todo
- Implement approx for Gaussian
- Add more tests from
TrueSkillThroughTime.jl - Generalise a time axis —
Timeis now a trait (Untimed,i64), not an enum - Add examples (
examples/atp.rs,examples/scored.rs) - Add Observer (
Observer/NullObserver) - Benchmark the inference loop (
benches/batch.rs,benches/history_converge.rs,benches/ingest.rs) - N-team
predict_outcomewith draw mass, andexpected_information_gain - Cross-check
quality()against sublee/trueskill — N identical teams follow the closed form(1/5)^((n-1)/2)for the conventional parameters, asserted for n = 2..10, and the n=3/n=5 values (0.200, 0.040) match the reference package
License
Licensed under either of
- Apache License, Version 2.0 (LICENSE-APACHE or http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0)
- MIT license (LICENSE-MIT or http://opensource.org/licenses/MIT)
at your option.
Contribution
Unless you explicitly state otherwise, any contribution intentionally submitted for inclusion in the work by you, as defined in the Apache-2.0 license, shall be dual licensed as above, without any additional terms or conditions.