Öskan: I have some thoughts about your specific points here, then some general thoughts. I'm writing as someone who used to write, co-write and proof-read a *lot* of problem statements for Code Jam, but has since left Google to be a full-time parent.
1. In both test sets, R ≤ C. It probably would have helped you (and me) if that were stated when R and C were introduced. For what it's worth, I often find reading the limits to be critical to my understanding of the problem, and usually read Statement -> Limits -> Statement -> Examples + Explanation. 2. """Then it continues with "each robot with at least one bit...", but this can mean both "all robots have at least a bit" or "all robots I'm using have at least a bit"."""" - In the previous paragraph, it explicitly states that some robots might not have a bit. It does this by saying "Any robot that gets no bits will not get to interact with a cashier, and will go away disappointed." - In that paragraph, it says what to do with the robots who have a bit: "Then, for each robot with at least one bit, you will..." I think that's unambiguous, but it's worth some thought on the team's end for whether it could have been made more clear. 3. The disappointed robots: I thought it was funny, and that the humour added to the problem. However, at that point you're right that we don't know whether disappointment is a problem mechanic. There *could* have been something later in the problem saying "Compute X with the constraint that no robots are disappointed." Perhaps an extra statement saying "That's OK; disappointment is part of life." would have made it clear that disappointment wasn't an important mechanic in this problem. 4. I agree that "all of the robots can finish interacting with their cashiers" could have been better phrased, since some robots don't interact with a cashier. Perhaps "all of the interactions between robots and cashiers can be finished" would have been better. Writing problems for ten thousand people, mostly not native speakers, is tough. You want the statement to be clear, unambiguous, and *interesting* <https://code.google.com/codejam/resources/problem-preparation#problem_statement>. About twelve people at Google will read a problem statement, and four of them are responsible for the final form of the statement. That includes one non-native speaker, who looks for things that could be hard for non-native speakers. Those people do what they can. Then *ten thousand people* will try to solve the problem. Some will find it confusing, in ways that will be much more obvious in retrospect than they were beforehand. You've pointed out some specific things you found confusing about the problem statement, and that's helpful. *Please keep doing that*. That's the kind of feedback that will help the team improve. Just realize that the problem they're trying to solve is a difficult one. Cheers, Bartholomew On Tue, May 1, 2018 at 11:08 AM Toby Tse <[email protected]> wrote: > The objective is to find the answer to thisquestion: "What is the earliest > time at which all of the robots can finish interacting with their cashiers > ?" > > It depends on what "all of the robots" refers to. In the analysis and in > my own solution, the interpretation is that the phrase refers to all robots > that has a cachier to interact with. However, now that you raised this > question, maybe "all of the robots" can also be interpreted as just > everyone of them. In this case, the phrase "their cachiers" would create > an assumption that every robot has a cachier to interact with. > > I don't think the line "each robot with at least one bit..." is ambiguous. > It just means the portion of the robots that has one bit. But this does not > mean that the potential that there might be a robot with no bits is ruled > out. > > GCJ team, please consider squeezing out ambiguities and simplifying the > situations. Put the fun bits in gray color so they don't distract the > non-native English users. > > > > On Tue, May 1, 2018, 09:36 Öskan Şavlı <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Let's say we have 5 cashiers and 6 robots, can I just use 5 of them and >> ignore the 6th robot? >> >> My interpretation is "yes", but I'm not sure. >> >> Here is the explanation in the problem: >> >> "Before the robots interact with any cashiers, you will distribute the >> bits among the robots however you want. (Bits must remain intact; you >> cannot break them up into fractional pieces!) Any robot that gets no bits >> will not get to interact with a cashier, and will go away disappointed. >> >> Then, for each robot with at least one bit, you will choose a different >> single cashier. " >> >> I think this is unclear. First it says you can distribute bits among >> robots however you want, but then it says robots with no bits will go away >> disappointed. What does this mean? Should I care a robot being disappointed? >> >> Then it continues with "each robot with at least one bit...", but this >> can mean both "all robots have at least a bit" or "all robots I'm using >> have at least a bit". >> >> If the answer is yes, then why the "robot being disappointed" part even >> mentioned in the problem? It's unnecessary and confusing. >> >> If the answer is no, then why you don't express it as simple as "Each >> robot should have at least one bit" and use a long and complicated >> paragraph instead? >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Google Code Jam" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to [email protected]. >> To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. >> To view this discussion on the web visit >> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/google-code/83b8f256-5140-43ad-ab61-b05231b592aa%40googlegroups.com >> . >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >> > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Google Code Jam" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/google-code/CANrP2_ModfZJa5Novtnc8dm2PPm0d_s_5GfTgo2WBbCe8916Ug%40mail.gmail.com > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/google-code/CANrP2_ModfZJa5Novtnc8dm2PPm0d_s_5GfTgo2WBbCe8916Ug%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> > . > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google Code Jam" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/google-code/CAHaiWHOojsv5j4eboj6%2BFbsphwuQQ21xjouevLhi2tqjYTHZbQ%40mail.gmail.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
