Ratings are a paradox. Mathematically they seem to dependent on other factors than ability. Yet people are obsessed with their rating as if it defines them as a person somehow.
Are their any papers that discuss the many problems that all current rating systems have along with their shortcomings and the ASSUMPTIONS that were used in deciding how to create a rating system.
Are there any statistical studies showing the distribution of wins/draws based on rating differences that have been validated and show whether the assumptions used in FIDE tables and other places are accurate?
OTOH Ratings are useful and 'close enough for government work' But they fall far short of what many people believe about them.