DWITE Issues

[A.J]

how on earth did they know the answers ???????????

[corriep]

saltpro15 @ Fri Feb 20, 2009 3:19 pm wrote:

I would like to apologize to my teammate for performing so horribly this round,

AHEM!

[Dan]

A.J @ 21st February 2009, 10:55 am wrote:

how on earth did they know the answers ???????????

They found an expolite in the judge that would make it dump the input back to them. I am not going to go in to more detail intill i fix the issue.

[saltpro15]

corriep @ Sat Feb 21, 2009 wrote:

saltpro15 @ Fri Feb 20, 2009 3:19 pm wrote:

I would like to apologize to my teammate for performing so horribly this round,

AHEM!

yeah I sucked, sorry paul, I'll do better next time, promise

[zero-impact]

saltpro15 @ Sat Feb 21, 2009 10:46 am wrote:

If you cheat on DWITE you're really only cheating yourself, unless you REALLY REALLY REALLY want that book

You must REALLY REALLY REALLY want that book then...

[saltpro15]

oh zero-impact you're just jealous we beat you two times in a row now lol jk

[A.J]

Dan wrote:

A.J @ 21st February 2009, 10:55 am wrote:

how on earth did they know the answers ???????????

They found an expolite in the judge that would make it dump the input back to them. I am not going to go in to more detail intill i fix the issue.

Aren't they going to get penalized? I think it is only fair to the teams they beat due the marks they got...(namely everyone lower than 4th place by 89 points!!!....they would have ended up 40th is it wasn't for that question...)

[Dan]

A.J @ 21st February 2009, 11:46 pm wrote:

Aren't they going to get penalized? I think it is only fair to the teams they beat due the marks they got...(namely everyone lower than 4th place by 89 points!!!....they would have ended up 40th is it wasn't for that question...)

Due to the way the rules are worded right now, it does not look like we can and fallow them. We do have plans to update the rules for next round to fix this loop hole (as well to try to fix the issue with the judge that allowed them to expolite it).

[Syrith]

aoen @ Fri Feb 20, 2009 1:50 am wrote:

Regardless we still got 3rd (mostly due to the fact that the questions were so impossible our heuristic algorithm that only covered one type of case beat most other teams XD)

You got 3rd? My team got 3rd.

[Syrith]

Dan @ Sun Feb 22, 2009 2:39 am wrote:

A.J @ 21st February 2009, 11:46 pm wrote:

Aren't they going to get penalized? I think it is only fair to the teams they beat due the marks they got...(namely everyone lower than 4th place by 89 points!!!....they would have ended up 40th is it wasn't for that question...)

Due to the way the rules are worded right now, it does not look like we can and fallow them. We do have plans to update the rules for next round to fix this loop hole (as well to try to fix the issue with the judge that allowed them to expolite it).

Could you contact their teacher about it?

[A.J]

Dan wrote:

A.J @ 21st February 2009, 11:46 pm wrote:

Aren't they going to get penalized? I think it is only fair to the teams they beat due the marks they got...(namely everyone lower than 4th place by 89 points!!!....they would have ended up 40th is it wasn't for that question...)

Due to the way the rules are worded right now, it does not look like we can and fallow them. We do have plans to update the rules for next round to fix this loop hole (as well to try to fix the issue with the judge that allowed them to expolite it).

What? So they'll get away with it and remain 4th place instead of 40th!!! Now THAT's unfair

[Saad]

A.J @ Sun Feb 22, 2009 11:16 am wrote:

Dan wrote:

A.J @ 21st February 2009, 11:46 pm wrote:

Aren't they going to get penalized? I think it is only fair to the teams they beat due the marks they got...(namely everyone lower than 4th place by 89 points!!!....they would have ended up 40th is it wasn't for that question...)

Due to the way the rules are worded right now, it does not look like we can and fallow them. We do have plans to update the rules for next round to fix this loop hole (as well to try to fix the issue with the judge that allowed them to expolite it).

What? So they'll get away with it and remain 4th place instead of 40th!!! Now THAT's unfair

No rules were in fact broken by what the team did.

Quote:

From the people category

3. Do not cheat. This is meant to be a practice competition.
- no consulting with non-team members in any manner
- no pre-written algorithms or code

This defines cheating as either consulting with other people that are not part of the team during the contest and as having pre-written code or algorithm. Based on the wording what the team did isn't breaking the rules. You may not agree with what they did but it doesn't change the fact that it is allowed.

Furthermore, if their marks were to be changed then it would be breaking the rule specified under the Problem Submission category.

Quote:

7. Decisions of Judge DWITE are final.

As changing the marks isn't allowed after the judge has marked it.

Rules can be found here.

[A.J]

Saad, you of all people should know what they did was cheating...they got the input from their first submission, manually solved the testcases, and then output the specific answers to testcases on their second submission!

if that isn't cheating, I don't know what is!

And NO, they do not define what cheating is there. They just say "Don't cheat". The points there are other things not to do. IT is obvious that you aren't supposed to get the input from your 1st submission and utilize it on your second submission !!!!

[Saad]

A.J @ Sun Feb 22, 2009 11:38 am wrote:

Saad, you of all people should know what they did was cheating...they got the input from their first submission, manually solved the testcases, and then output the specific answers to testcases on their second submission!

if that isn't cheating, I don't know what is!

It is irrelevant to care if I see it as cheating or what you consider cheating. What is important is whether the DWITE rules define it as cheating or not. Since the rules do not consider it cheating (see previous post) then the team's method was fair game.

A.J @ Sun Feb 22, 2009 11:38 am wrote:

And NO, they do not define what cheating is there. They just say "Don't cheat". The points there are other things not to do.

If it was another thing not to do then it would have been a different point on its own. Since it is a sub list, it means that it defines what cheating is which is like taking a general category and listing down points that help make it more specific.

A.J @ Sun Feb 22, 2009 11:38 am wrote:

IT is obvious that you aren't supposed to get the input from your 1st submission and utilize it on your second submission !!!!

Where are you getting this from? If it is based on your definition of cheating then it is irrelevant.

[A.J]

Saad wrote:

Where are you getting this from? If it is based on your definition of cheating then it is irrelevant.

Saad?!?! You serious?!?! That's not MY definition of cheating...it is just WRONG! Why don't you look at the testcases for CCC and then use them to output the desired output? It isn't on their RULES! But it is still considered cheating!!!