tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8677649049588007585.post2776169818881176637..comments2023-06-18T16:15:22.432+01:00Comments on PL/SQL Challenge: An update regarding very fast answersSteven Feuersteinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16619706770920320550noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8677649049588007585.post-27335140908736212742010-08-07T12:54:36.888+01:002010-08-07T12:54:36.888+01:00"I would like to see, on the 'previous qu..."I would like to see, on the 'previous quiz' page, the percentage of people who got any choice right/wrong. It would be good to see where people's mis-conceptions lie."<br /><br />+1 from meAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8677649049588007585.post-10531571862314798332010-08-07T02:47:03.114+01:002010-08-07T02:47:03.114+01:00One issue with Bora's suggestion is that, some...One issue with Bora's suggestion is that, someone offered 5 options in the quiz can get a better score than someone with only 4 options since each option earns you points if you successfully say whether it is right or wrong.<br /><br />Personally, I'd let them get through to the quarterly challenge (or a 'Fastest Gun' challenge at the same time) and see if they can reproduce their results when there's no chance of cheating the timing algorithm.<br />If they are the Usain Bolt's of the PL/SQL world, then so be it. If they are the Ben Johnson's, then that'll show them up.<br /><br />I would like to see, on the 'previous quiz' page, the percentage of people who got any choice right/wrong. It would be good to see where people's mis-conceptions lie.SydOraclehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08828771074492585943noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8677649049588007585.post-25321363953777352832010-08-06T20:29:22.325+01:002010-08-06T20:29:22.325+01:00Bora,
That is a fascinating idea - and, I must a...Bora, <br /><br />That is a fascinating idea - and, I must admit, well beyond our ability/bandwidth to implement right now. Perhaps someday....<br /><br />SFSteven Feuersteinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16619706770920320550noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8677649049588007585.post-3621551916276383082010-08-06T20:16:36.324+01:002010-08-06T20:16:36.324+01:00Hello,
If you could make every single player see a...Hello,<br />If you could make every single player see a different answer set for a particular question, it would be very very hard to cheat. However, this causes you to work far more harder on the questions' background.<br />For example, for a question, let me see 3 options that are totally incorrect; other player can see 5 options: 1 correct, 4 incorrect; the other may see 6 options: 4 correct, 2 incorrect.<br />Ideally, every player must see a different answer set for a question but this is too difficult to do, so you can prepare 5 or 6 different answer sets and every player may get 1 out of possible ones. This may reduce the possibility of cheaters' cooperation.Borahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07302203351181934021noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8677649049588007585.post-6176648784285152172010-08-06T16:08:57.942+01:002010-08-06T16:08:57.942+01:00Here's my idea for an algorithm that is less s...Here's my idea for an algorithm that is less subjective (not based solely on a single individual's opinion of the correct "cut-off time", but is also adjusted on actual time taken by each individual player vs. other players). Any numbers/percentages given below should be adjusted to best fit the algorithm to an analysis of the actual existing data.<br /><br />After the completion of the day's quiz, start by taking a set of FPs (Fast Players) by taking the fastest 200 players or fastest 10% of players for the day (The sample taken should be at least twice as large as the number of suspected TFPs). This could also be done by taking all players whose time was less than say 45 or 60 seconds, or perhaps your reasonable Minimum (RM) + 5 or 10 seconds, as beyond that time you will have players who are doing more than reading & answering the questions based on their existing knowledge (reading documentation, testing code blocks, etc.)<br /><br />Now, determine the average (mean) time taken by all identified FPs for the day, take take a percentage of this (say 50%) to the nearest second, then add a 2 second grace period to the minimum non-cheating time for the day.<br /><br />Anything under the non-cheating time should be penalized by seconds as you have suggested, and anyone 50% or more under the adjusted minimum time should be scored as 0.<br /><br />The averaging and grace period should help to separate the likely cheaters from "honest" TFPs, as questions that are able to be answered much more quickly (and therefore more players are likely to answer quickly) will penalize less players because the adjusted minimum time will be lowered.Ryanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01933879578495746805noreply@blogger.com