That's the whole point I am trying to make. Which one is easier? Checking some boundary condition like I forgot to check for a zero length input or some extreme value in the input or actually improving the algorithm, let's say, from n2 to nlgn? My guess is the second one? So why have one hour for the first and 8 mins for the second? As far as the GCJ being perfect, I don't think so. Everybody (that includes GCJ) has the scope to improve. Over the last couple of years we have seen a number of changes to the format of GCJ (including opening up all of first rounds for everybody). These are all changes for the better. And I think that it will be foolish to assume that GCJ is perfect today. Somebody in this thread mentioned that "there is lot of fun for amateurs in solving the small data set", I am saying there is lots of fun for everybody in solving small data set as well as writing efficient algorithm to solve the larger data set. Why deprive the second set while catering to the first one?
Manish, Regarding not having power for the whole day !!! Come to think of it, there can be many mishaps to an aspiring participant, for example he can break an arm and a leg in a football match the day before. I am sure GCJ can't do anything about it. What it CAN do though, is have the format in such a way that minimizes the loss to a participant due to some minor glitches like a small power outage, or the blue screen of death, etc. On May 21, 5:11 pm, yiuyuho <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > To me, the small data set is more a sampling of the problem, whereas > the large data set is the actual solving of the problem. In other > words, the large data set tests for correctness (only allow 1 > submission for judgement) and efficiency (large input range), whereas > the small data doesn't do neither - well, it does, be in a smaller > scale. > > So, you may think of the large data set as the harder version of the > small, both in terms of correctness (1 go vs. fixable) and efficiency > (large vs small input ranges). And, by the way, you can *still* > improve your algorithm if it is found inefficient, but you only have 8 > minutes to do that. > > regards, > yiuyuho > > On May 21, 1:25 am, Debashis Roy <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > Hi, > > > The format of the contest doesn't look very fair, given the fact that a > > person can submit the small data set multiple times in case of incorrect > > result but cannot re-submit the large data set in case of time outs. > > > To me, the small data set is more to check the accuracy of the algorithm > > whereas the large data set is to check the efficiency of the algorithm. > > > If that is true then what gcj is saying translates to "we will allow you to > > correct your algorithm if you have an incorrect algorithm, but we will not > > allow you to improve upon your algorithm if you have an inefficient > > algorithm!!!" > > > Any particular reason for this? :-) > > > Thanks, > > > Debashis > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > Climate, controversies and the changing signatures of > > naturehttp://green.in.msn.com/ > > > -- > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > > "google-codejam" group. > > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > > [email protected]. > > For more options, visit this group > > athttp://groups.google.com/group/google-code?hl=en. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "google-codejam" group. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [email protected]. > For more options, visit this group > athttp://groups.google.com/group/google-code?hl=en.- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "google-codejam" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-code?hl=en.
