![](http://i.imgsafe.org/4fdb405442.png)

Two days ago, I posted [How Much Do Whales Influences on Rewards?](https://steemit.com/stats/@clayop/how-much-do-whales-influences-on-rewards-introducing-new-statistics). After posting it and having discussion with others, I found this study can provide more deeper understanding of curation patterns. As a follow-up study, this post is focusing on typology of curations: grouping curators by certain patterns.
  

## Method
I used [*k*-means clustering](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/K-means_clustering) to classify the top 100 curators (by influence) into four groups. The sample's total influence is 99.5%, which means almost all of curation is done by the top 100 curators.
  

## Data and Variables
The data is from Steem blockchain from 2016/8/16 to 2016/9/10.
  
- Influence: Percentage of payout a curator used
- Power: Percentage of Steem Power a curator owns
- IPR: Ratio between influence and power (Utilization of Steem Power)
- N: Number of votes a curator casted during the study period
- Range: Number of unique writers a curator voted for
- Mean: Average number of votes per writer
- Max: Maximum number of votes on a writer repeatedly
- StDev: Standard deviation among a curator's votes on each writer
  
The following table presents some descriptive statistics about the four groups.
  
  
Group | Sum_Influence | Avr_Influence | Sum_Power | Avr_Power | Avr_IPR | Avr_N | Avr_Range | Avr_Mean | Avr_Max | Avr_StDev
-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-
1 | 15.86 | 0.51 | 30.33 | 0.98 | 0.52 | 120.51 | 123.71 | 0.97 | 5.97 | 0.90
2 | 46.99 | 1.20 | 18.11 | 0.46 | 2.59 | 582.55 | 329.72 | 1.77 | 24.09 | 2.65
3 | 31.83 | 1.38 | 10.82 | 0.47 | 2.94 | 802.70 | 260.96 | 3.08 | 61.93 | 6.58
4 | 5.27 | 0.75 | 1.35 | 0.19 | 3.90 | 1410.57 | 164.57 | 8.57 | 70.00 | 12.08
Total | 99.95 | - | 60.61 | - | 1.65 | 547.91 | 238.48 | 2.51 | 30.39 | 3.67
  
  
  
## 1. Lazy Lions
  
Curator in this group show low utilization of Steem Power on average (0.52), but they still have a great potential to become influential curators since they have more power than the other groups (0.98). The list of curators is as follow.
  
  
Account | Influence | Power | IPR | N | Range | Mean | Max | StDev
-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-
@dantheman | 3.41 | 2.54 | 1.34 | 222 | 340 | 0.65 | 10 | 1.24
@jamesc | 2.72 | 3.19 | 0.85 | 150 | 135 | 1.11 | 14 | 1.86
@rainman | 1.80 | 1.49 | 1.21 | 203 | 171 | 1.19 | 10 | 1.31
@ned | 1.56 | 5.72 | 0.27 | 45 | 254 | 0.18 | 3 | 0.37
@val-a | 0.88 | 2.80 | 0.32 | 26 | 77 | 0.33 | 2 | 0.49
@fuzzyvest | 0.57 | 0.58 | 0.97 | 306 | 214 | 1.43 | 12 | 1.93
@dan | 0.44 | 4.49 | 0.10 | 1 | 12 | 0.09 | 1 | 0.36
@witness.svk | 0.42 | 0.54 | 0.78 | 169 | 130 | 1.30 | 10 | 1.24
@wackou | 0.34 | 0.62 | 0.55 | 92 | 57 | 1.61 | 10 | 1.59
@skywalker | 0.28 | 0.63 | 0.44 | 18 | 13 | 1.38 | 3 | 0.62
@laonie | 0.27 | 0.14 | 1.87 | 1230 | 1227 | 1.00 | 17 | 1.32
@blackjack | 0.26 | 1.00 | 0.26 | 15 | 12 | 1.25 | 2 | 0.43
@roadscape | 0.26 | 0.65 | 0.40 | 54 | 60 | 0.91 | 4 | 0.77
@lafona-miner | 0.25 | 0.28 | 0.91 | 201 | 148 | 1.36 | 8 | 1.00
@firstclass | 0.21 | 0.66 | 0.31 | 17 | 12 | 1.42 | 4 | 0.86
@arhag | 0.19 | 0.61 | 0.31 | 30 | 40 | 0.75 | 3 | 0.60
@freedom | 0.18 | 0.53 | 0.34 | 17 | 12 | 1.42 | 4 | 0.86
@cryptoctopus | 0.17 | 0.15 | 1.13 | 147 | 111 | 1.33 | 9 | 1.17
@proskynneo | 0.16 | 0.54 | 0.30 | 59 | 82 | 0.72 | 2 | 0.44
@datasecuritynode | 0.16 | 0.44 | 0.36 | 21 | 18 | 1.17 | 3 | 0.50
@books | 0.14 | 0.16 | 0.85 | 17 | 13 | 1.31 | 4 | 0.82
@disney | 0.14 | 0.15 | 0.92 | 16 | 13 | 1.23 | 2 | 0.42
@bmw | 0.14 | 0.18 | 0.74 | 17 | 13 | 1.31 | 4 | 0.82
@samupaha | 0.14 | 0.20 | 0.67 | -2 | 241 | -0.01 | 17 | 2.24
@alphabet | 0.13 | 0.33 | 0.40 | 15 | 14 | 1.07 | 2 | 0.26
@excalibur | 0.11 | 0.32 | 0.36 | 15 | 14 | 1.07 | 2 | 0.26
@analisa | 0.11 | 0.40 | 0.27 | 3 | 3 | 1.00 | 1 | 0.00
@arsahk | 0.11 | 0.39 | 0.28 | 4 | 3 | 1.33 | 2 | 0.47
@bitcoin2016 | 0.11 | 0.42 | 0.25 | 17 | 12 | 1.42 | 3 | 0.76
@delegate.lafona | 0.10 | 0.10 | 1.03 | 201 | 148 | 1.36 | 8 | 1.00
@cryptogee | 0.10 | 0.08 | 1.25 | 411 | 236 | 1.74 | 12 | 1.79
  
  
  
## 2. Hidden Gem Explorers
  
This group consists of the biggest part of the total influence (46.99%) and they have the highest range and the second lowest Max and StDev. This implies that their votes are dispersed to various authors.
  
  
Account | Influence | Power | IPR | N | Range | Mean | Max | StDev
-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-
@blocktrades | 11.29 | 3.71 | 3.04 | 630 | 486 | 1.30 | 22 | 1.51
@berniesanders | 10.41 | 2.97 | 3.50 | 997 | 787 | 1.27 | 15 | 1.71
@tombstone | 3.62 | 1.87 | 1.94 | 321 | 196 | 1.64 | 12 | 2.18
@summon | 3.00 | 1.29 | 2.32 | 364 | 221 | 1.65 | 14 | 1.99
@complexring | 2.49 | 0.67 | 3.69 | 958 | 544 | 1.76 | 40 | 3.08
@nextgencrypto | 1.75 | 0.51 | 3.41 | 1061 | 759 | 1.40 | 14 | 1.51
@pharesim | 1.64 | 0.87 | 1.88 | 837 | 406 | 2.06 | 54 | 3.93
@silversteem | 1.55 | 0.46 | 3.37 | 1381 | 760 | 1.82 | 15 | 2.08
@riverhead | 1.55 | 0.69 | 2.25 | 518 | 336 | 1.54 | 13 | 1.41
@steemit200 | 1.54 | 0.56 | 2.74 | 438 | 178 | 2.46 | 14 | 2.35
@satoshifund | 0.97 | 0.35 | 2.78 | 329 | 130 | 2.53 | 21 | 3.61
@au1nethyb1 | 0.78 | 0.43 | 1.84 | 417 | 209 | 2.00 | 11 | 1.81
@silver | 0.71 | 0.19 | 3.76 | 1403 | 763 | 1.84 | 15 | 2.13
@badassmother | 0.69 | 0.26 | 2.68 | 662 | 237 | 2.79 | 16 | 2.83
@donkeypong | 0.47 | 0.25 | 1.90 | 481 | 286 | 1.68 | 15 | 2.02
@joseph | 0.45 | 0.19 | 2.37 | 374 | 155 | 2.41 | 30 | 3.63
@xeroc | 0.35 | 0.18 | 1.93 | 478 | 240 | 1.99 | 45 | 3.48
@rossco99 | 0.30 | 0.15 | 1.99 | 210 | 119 | 1.76 | 13 | 1.56
@justin | 0.25 | 0.07 | 3.60 | 1097 | 774 | 1.42 | 14 | 1.50
@clayop | 0.25 | 0.56 | 0.44 | 209 | 78 | 2.67 | 27 | 4.53
@slowwalker | 0.24 | 0.08 | 3.19 | 895 | 437 | 2.05 | 28 | 3.61
@cass | 0.21 | 0.10 | 2.04 | 454 | 219 | 2.07 | 20 | 2.53
@boatymcboatface | 0.20 | 0.06 | 3.44 | 185 | 111 | 1.67 | 11 | 1.37
@james212 | 0.20 | 0.09 | 2.20 | 570 | 231 | 2.47 | 29 | 4.21
@steempower | 0.19 | 0.12 | 1.66 | 495 | 215 | 2.30 | 37 | 3.62
@onceuponatime | 0.19 | 0.28 | 0.68 | 380 | 198 | 1.92 | 43 | 3.88
@sean-king | 0.16 | 0.13 | 1.22 | 399 | 228 | 1.75 | 32 | 2.68
@dollarvigilante | 0.16 | 0.07 | 2.29 | 622 | 239 | 2.60 | 46 | 4.23
@steemservices | 0.16 | 0.05 | 3.13 | 921 | 780 | 1.18 | 14 | 2.66
@stellabelle | 0.15 | 0.21 | 0.74 | 477 | 243 | 1.96 | 44 | 4.27
@renohq | 0.14 | 0.13 | 1.07 | 270 | 113 | 2.39 | 15 | 2.51
@anwenbaumeister | 0.13 | 0.07 | 1.79 | 771 | 425 | 1.82 | 28 | 2.40
@toxic | 0.13 | 0.05 | 2.40 | 173 | 107 | 1.62 | 12 | 1.48
@kevinwong | 0.13 | 0.06 | 2.20 | 973 | 472 | 2.06 | 42 | 3.08
@steemychicken1 | 0.12 | 0.15 | 0.81 | 259 | 149 | 1.74 | 19 | 2.63
@the-alien | 0.11 | 0.04 | 2.54 | 247 | 248 | 1.00 | 8 | 0.77
@steemrollin | 0.11 | 0.07 | 1.51 | 332 | 231 | 1.44 | 14 | 1.81
@inboundinken | 0.10 | 0.03 | 2.96 | 539 | 257 | 2.10 | 20 | 2.20
@liondani | 0.10 | 0.09 | 1.11 | 594 | 292 | 2.03 | 60 | 4.44
  
  
  
## 3. Village Builders
  
While this group has a significant influence on payout, they votes for small groups of writers repeatedly, probably due to build their own communities (they have very high Max and StDev). A good example is @abit and @boombastic who support the Chinese community. They have relatively high possibility to be developed into their own [DCGs](https://steemit.com/steemit/@steemship/open-letter-to-ned-and-dan-you-badly-need-a-communications-community-content-expert-and-i-hereby-nominate-stellabelle-or#@ned/re-steemship-open-letter-to-ned-and-dan-you-badly-need-a-communications-community-content-expert-and-i-hereby-nominate-stellabelle-or-20160911t011254010z) suggested by @ned
  
  
Account | Influence | Power | IPR | N | Range | Mean | Max | StDev
-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-
@smooth | 13.19 | 2.86 | 4.62 | 791 | 343 | 2.31 | 65 | 7.50
@steemed | 4.07 | 1.60 | 2.54 | 298 | 80 | 3.72 | 45 | 6.54
@itsascam | 3.94 | 1.53 | 2.57 | 297 | 79 | 3.76 | 45 | 6.60
@smooth.witness | 2.29 | 0.53 | 4.30 | 782 | 327 | 2.39 | 65 | 7.63
@steempty | 1.28 | 0.70 | 1.84 | 478 | 165 | 2.90 | 34 | 4.83
@kushed | 1.17 | 0.50 | 2.34 | 657 | 251 | 2.62 | 85 | 7.40
@xeldal | 1.15 | 0.65 | 1.78 | 597 | 204 | 2.92 | 48 | 5.65
@enki | 0.91 | 0.53 | 1.72 | 560 | 174 | 3.22 | 46 | 5.58
@steemroller | 0.46 | 0.18 | 2.57 | 295 | 73 | 4.04 | 44 | 6.69
@abit | 0.45 | 0.64 | 0.71 | 783 | 201 | 3.90 | 60 | 7.48
@cyber | 0.43 | 0.11 | 4.02 | 2058 | 450 | 4.57 | 66 | 8.08
@boombastic | 0.33 | 0.10 | 3.41 | 870 | 261 | 3.33 | 44 | 5.71
@anonymous | 0.32 | 0.13 | 2.43 | 937 | 685 | 1.37 | 114 | 5.50
@nanzo-scoop | 0.29 | 0.07 | 4.14 | 859 | 196 | 4.38 | 57 | 7.23
@eeks | 0.24 | 0.07 | 3.51 | 1064 | 231 | 4.61 | 43 | 5.85
@barrie | 0.23 | 0.06 | 3.63 | 832 | 220 | 3.78 | 44 | 6.02
@tuck-fheman | 0.20 | 0.11 | 1.91 | 953 | 350 | 2.72 | 76 | 5.99
@juneaugoldbuyer | 0.18 | 0.06 | 2.99 | 1230 | 303 | 4.06 | 54 | 6.42
@gavvet | 0.18 | 0.11 | 1.66 | 687 | 274 | 2.51 | 50 | 6.18
@ihashfury | 0.16 | 0.10 | 1.57 | 848 | 203 | 4.18 | 55 | 7.75
@benjojo | 0.14 | 0.13 | 1.06 | 870 | 233 | 3.73 | 28 | 5.44
@mummyimperfect | 0.11 | 0.02 | 5.35 | 621 | 154 | 4.03 | 45 | 6.16
@nabilov | 0.11 | 0.03 | 3.27 | 1098 | 545 | 2.01 | 211 | 9.11
  


## 4. Superhumans
  
They are possibly bots. They have very high N on average (1410.57) and the highest IPR (3.90). They may have very high curation rewards profitability.
  
  
Account | Influence | Power | IPR | N | Range | Mean | Max | StDev
-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-
@wang | 1.93 | 0.66 | 2.91 | 1778 | 213 | 8.35 | 82 | 10.51
@recursive | 1.60 | 0.31 | 5.22 | 1198 | 123 | 9.74 | 51 | 11.81
@hr1 | 1.02 | 0.21 | 4.80 | 1086 | 104 | 10.44 | 52 | 12.00
@jl777 | 0.19 | 0.05 | 3.90 | 2434 | 393 | 6.19 | 78 | 9.80
@recursive2 | 0.18 | 0.04 | 4.07 | 1173 | 102 | 11.50 | 80 | 13.88
@taoteh1221 | 0.18 | 0.04 | 4.67 | 1010 | 116 | 8.71 | 67 | 11.57
@recursive3 | 0.17 | 0.04 | 3.99 | 1195 | 101 | 11.83 | 80 | 14.98
  


  
## Conclusion
  
Curation is a very important task in Steemit. More understanding of curation will provide constructive foundations for further growth of Steemit.