Quality score formula – TQAuditor Wiki

From TQAuditor Wiki

Quality score formula visualisation and interpretation

1. Account score limit

The highest possible score (100 by default). Can be set on this page: [Evaluation settings]

2. Mistake severity score

Score of mistake by its severity (for example, 1 point for minor and 5 points for major mistakes). Can be set on this page: [Mistake severities list]

3. Mistake type weight

Weight of a specific mistake type by specialization. Can be adjusted on this page [Mistake types list]

4. SUM

A sum of products of #2 and #3 for all the mistakes.

5. Project evaluation word count

Automatic word count: The value from the “Total source words” field in the “Evaluation details” section (not the Total source words of a file). Please see the Automatic vs. manual word count page.

Manual word count: The value from the “Evaluated source words” field (specified when starting the evaluation with a manual word count).

6. 1000

In the end, the result is always converted to 1000, a most optimal value.

The mistake severity scores, mistake type weights, and reports are based on this 1000-word amount. For example, a critical mistake with score of 20 with weight coefficient of 1 reduces the quality score by 20 per 1000 words (by 10 per 2000 words, accordingly, and so on).

For more information, please check the Quality score formula:Details and versions page.

Quality score calculation examples

In the examples below, the following quality standard is used:

Automatic word count

‎

File details:

Total source words: 3126

Fully reviewed: yes

Number of units (segments): 392

Project specialization – marketing

Evaluation settings:

Evaluation details:

Total source words: 1749

Source words in corrected units: 1002

Mistakes:

1. Major

   (

   3

   points each):

   1. Terminology: 1 (weight coefficient

      1

      )

   2. Grammar: 1 (weight coefficient

      1.2

      )

2. Minor

   (

   1

   point each):

   1. Grammar: 3 (weight coefficient

      1.2

      )

   2. Functional: 2 (weight coefficient

      1

      )

3. Repetitive

   (

   0.01

   point each):

   1. Functional: 6 (weight coefficient

      1

      )

   2. Layout: 8 (weight coefficient

      1

      )

4. Non-scoring

   (

   0

   points each):

   1. Style: 5 (weight coefficient

      1.2

      )

   2. Terminology: 3 (weight coefficient

      1

      )

Total mistakes: 29

SUM: 1*

3

*

1

+1*

3

*

1.2

+3*

1

*

1.2

+2*

1

*

1

+6*

0.01

*

1

+8*

0.01

*

1

+5*

0

*

1.2

+3*

0

*

1

=3+3.6+3.6+2+0.06+0.08+0+0=12.34

Quality score calculation:

Using the formula:
100-(12.34/1749*1000)=92.94

Manual word count

‎

File details:

Total source words: 3126

Fully reviewed: no

Number of words in a reviewed part of the file: around 1500

Number of units (segments): 392

Project specialization – marketing

Evaluation settings:

‎Evaluated source words: 1500

Evaluation details:

Corrected units: 227

Total source words: 1500

Mistakes:

1. Major

   (

   3

   points each):

   1. Terminology: 1 (weight coefficient

      1

      )

   2. Grammar: 1 (weight coefficient

      1.2

      )

2. Minor

   (

   1

   point each):

   1. Grammar: 3 (weight coefficient

      1.2

      )

   2. Functional: 2 (weight coefficient

      1

      )

3. Repetitive

   (

   0.01

   point each):

   1. Functional: 6 (weight coefficient

      1

      )

   2. Layout: 8 (weight coefficient

      1

      )

4. Non-scoring

   (

   0

   points each):

   1. Style: 5 (weight coefficient

      1.2

      )

   2. Terminology: 3 (weight coefficient

      1

      )

Total mistakes: 29

SUM: 1*

3

*

1

+1*

3

*

1.2

+3*

1

*

1.2

+2*

1

*

1

+6*

0.01

*

1

+8*

0.01

*

1

+5*

0

*

1.2

+3*

0

*

1

=3+3.6+3.6+2+0.06+0.08+0+0=12.34

Quality score calculation:

Using the formula:
100-(12.34/1500*1000)=91.77