|
THIS SITE MOVED A LONG TIME AGO!! But the HTML remained in extremely bad form http://www.polarhome.com:753/~juang/ |
|
The Miami University HS Programming Contest is a four-person team thing:
11 BARRETT, Jimmy (Co-Captain)
11 GHAMSARI, Nima (Co-Captain)
11 JUANG, Jason (Co-Captain)
Note how we only had three people. Mike Appleby, a few days before the competition, decided to pull out because he had to ... I don't know, be with his mom or something (seriously). He also happened to be participating in an anti-protest protest on Fountain Square that day.
So how the hell does a programming contest work anyway?
There are 8 problems. Upon the submission of a correct program, penalty points are given: 1 for every minute elapsed since the start of the contest and 20 for every incorrect submission of that particular problem.
For the problem to be judged correct, the judges run the program with their sample data. The output of the program must match the judge's "official" output EXACTLY. (i.e. the program must handle every possible test case and exception and output exactly what the problem calls for.)
Anyway ... placings are determined by highest number of problems solved, and then by lowest number of penalty points.
| Rank | Team | Solved | Penalty | A | B | C | D | E | F | G | H | Att/Sol |
| T-1 | Cincinnati Country Day A | 7 | (725) | 1/67 | 1/88 | 1/8 | 2/184 | 1/109 | 1/(190) | 1/59 | 0/-- | 8/7 |
| T-1 | Lakota East A | 7 | (1082) | 5/195 | 2/132 | 1/27 | 1/229 | 1/138 | 1/171 | 1/90 | 0/-- | 12/7 |
| 3 | Seven Hills A | 5 | 556 | 1/133 | 0/-- | 1/12 | 0/-- | 1/237 | 1/104 | 1/70 | 0/-- | 5/5 |
| 4 | Lakota West A | 4 | 390 | 3/178 | 1/97 | 1/29 | 2/-- | 0/-- | 0/-- | 1/46 | 0/-- | 8/4 |
| 5 | Park Tudor A | 4 | 483 | 0/-- | 3/162 | 1/25 | 0/-- | 2/162 | 0/-- | 2/54 | 0/-- | 8/4 |
| 6 | Wapakoneta B | 3 | 164 | 2/-- | 0/-- | 1/16 | 0/-- | 1/101 | 0/-- | 1/47 | 0/-- | 5/3 |
| 7 | Turpin B | 3 | 173 | 0/-- | 3/-- | 1/13 | 0/-- | 2/102 | 0/-- | 1/38 | 0/-- | 7/3 |
| 8 | Lakota East D | 3 | 230 | 1/158 | 0/-- | 1/21 | 0/-- | 1/51 | 0/-- | 2/-- | 0/-- | 5/3 |
| 9 | Mason A | 3 | 238 | 1/33 | 0/-- | 1/127 | 0/-- | 1/78 | 0/-- | 4/-- | 0/-- | 7/3 |
| 10 | Mariemont A | 3 | 239 | 2/140 | 3/-- | 2/14 | 0/-- | 1/45 | 0/-- | 3/-- | 0/-- | 11/3 |
| 11 | Wapakoneta A | 3 | 412 | 0/-- | 0/-- | 1/12 | 0/-- | 2/225 | 0/-- | 1/155 | 0/-- | 4/3 |
| 12 | Lakota West B | 2 | 99 | 0/-- | 0/-- | 1/12 | 0/-- | 1/-- | 0/-- | 1/87 | 0/-- | 3/2 |
| 13 | Hudson A | 2 | 244 | 0/-- | 3/-- | 1/39 | 0/-- | 0/-- | 0/-- | 1/205 | 0/-- | 5/2 |
| 14 | Turpin A | 2 | 279 | 0/-- | 2/-- | 1/103 | 0/-- | 0/-- | 0/-- | 1/176 | 0/-- | 4/2 |
| 15 | Lakota East B | 2 | 303 | 2/-- | 2/-- | 2/148 | 0/-- | 0/-- | 0/-- | 1/135 | 1/-- | 8/2 |
| 16 | Park Tudor B | 2 | 445 | 5/237 | 0/-- | 2/-- | 0/-- | 0/-- | 0/-- | 1/128 | 0/-- | 8/2 |
| 17 | Lakota East E | 1 | 83 | 0/-- | 0/-- | 1/83 | 0/-- | 0/-- | 0/-- | 1/-- | 0/-- | 2/1 |
| 18 | Peebles A | 1 | 134 | 0/-- | 0/-- | 3/94 | 0/-- | 0/-- | 0/-- | 3/-- | 0/-- | 6/1 |
| 19 | Lakota East C | 1 | 223 | 0/-- | 0/-- | 2/203 | 0/-- | 0/-- | 0/-- | 0/-- | 0/-- | 2/1 |
| Attempts | 23 | 20 | 25 | 5 | 14 | 4 | 27 | 1 | 119 | |||
| First Solution Time | 33 | 88 | 8 | 184 | 45 | 104 | 38 | -- | ||||
| Solved | 8 | 4 | 18 | 2 | 10 | 2 | 13 | 0 | 57 |
(Numbers in red are corrected results, announced April 28 after I found an error in the test data.)
We were doing great the first three hours. C was, I thought, a spectacular typing job by me. 4 of the minutes were spent trying to remember how to use qsort, but within 2 minutes I had decided that "qsort is a bitch" and just wrote a cheap sorting algorithm. Hey, you only had to sort three things, it's not like qsort would have saved any time.
We would have had G in 40 minutes earlier, but for some reason iostream decided to suddenly stop working, and while Nima worked on another problem, I decided I was just going to say "SUCK IT!" to iostream (I was very loose-tongued during the competition) and just use stdio. Surprise ... it worked.
A is an interesting story. We burned a good twenty minutes trying to fix a problem that wasn't broken. It was returned as a wrong answer at time 67, but when we resubmitted at time 119, having changed almost nothing, we got two responses of "Yes," meaning "Correct." We didn't take much notice until later when we looked at the results, and noticed that our first answer had been accepted later as they apparently noticed a mistake.
D was another one of the stupid type-a-lot ones. Afterwards, the contest director mentioned that the most common problem was that people misspelled "Forty."
The last hour did not go as well. We got D in just barely past the 180 minute scoreboard-freeze mark, so nobody saw us do it. (The first submission was at time 148. It contained a stupid but quickly-fixed mistake. We didn't bother to take the time to test it.)
F (submitted at 190 and 238) was the one that we got right but they ruled wrong due to illegal test data. Ask me for details and I might almost give them to you.
Only one team submitted any kind of solution to H. They admitted they had no idea what they were doing. Nima very nearly finished a solution, but thanks to confusion between rows and columns, and some of our other stupidity involving hard-coding test cases, it ... well, it didn't work.
I love this contest. One more year... we'll make sure to win it then too.
|
|
|