×

Copied problem in COOK89

 8 I'm sorry about this issue, when it was proposed to me it sounded like a standard problem, but the fact that it included negative numbers and the solution involved using a stack and not as simple as binary search/two pointers, that fact made me feel that the problem is original. Unfortunately, I missed googling this problem before approving it. There's no evidence that the problem setter actually copied the problem, so we will not penalize him. answered 25 Dec '17, 16:57 184●8●22 accept rate: 12% Thank you for the reply @kingofnumbers . The decision taken is, indeed, quite fair in my opinion.. :) (25 Dec '17, 18:31) That's no problem @kingofnumbers. I didn't knew that problem testing include googling step too (silly of me). PS:I'm glad no one is actually penalized because of me. :) (25 Dec '17, 21:35)
 6 This platform is for learning something new and practicing, why you people are just seeing it with respect of rating. Rating goes up and down,it doesn't matter much, I think we should focus on learning not to waste our precious time on discussing such issues.Instead Discuss some problem,you all are very wise,employ some wisdom.Merry Christmas:) answered 25 Dec '17, 21:24 61●1 accept rate: 0% 1 Merry christmas. I don't care about rating. I just wished to bring this to notice of admins, that's all. Hope u understand. (25 Dec '17, 21:31)
 1 This shouldn't happen in a standard contest like "Cook-Off". :( answered 25 Dec '17, 01:18 297●9 accept rate: 10% Agreed @rohit_0801 (25 Dec '17, 01:37)
 0 @taran_1407 that gfg solution will not work for d less than 0.I tried a similar solution to that at first,but got wa.Reason:lets say indexes 0-4 is one solution,so it'll increase 0 to 1 ,so we'll check 1-4,2-4...,bt this method would never check for 1-2 in this case answered 25 Dec '17, 01:29 1.5k●2●9 accept rate: 23% I too tried the java version of given solution and got WA, but thought that only java version gives WA. I guess i should remove that link from post. (25 Dec '17, 01:34)
 0 What we went through during icpc was that less that codechef has stooped so low TO hell with codechef answered 25 Dec '17, 01:30 1★cuteaf 1 accept rate: 0% I too hope future contest don't have such problems. (25 Dec '17, 01:37) 1 If you have so many problems, why are you here. Honestly, you have 2 options- improve yourself, or cry in a corner forever. Sorry, but you arent going to get success with this attitude. (25 Dec '17, 18:36) @codeaf, dont mistake my tone in following comment. Did u know about that problem solution being available?? Did u solve the problem urself? If no then the problem was new for you and you should try to solve this on your own. PS: I dont know what u went through ICPC, and my concern was that if next time there doesn't appear a similar case. But i wont say codechef stooped low because i know that the mistake was unintentional. (25 Dec '17, 21:26)
 0 moreover, people are getting AC in O(n^2) such poor test cases is not fair for everyone...should be unrated..didn't expect from codechef answered 25 Dec '17, 02:49 -6 accept rate: 0% for(i=1;i=d) { b=0; for(j=i;j>=e;j--) { b+=v[j]; if(b>=d) { e=j;break; } } for worst case this goes O(n^2) but got AC (25 Dec '17, 02:53) 1 Just what percentage of users are affected by it? How many $O({N}^{2})$ solutions passed? You can give this feedback to the tester, that he did not do a good job in testing the problem- thats perfectly fine. But asking for cancellation of contest/make it unrated because 10-15 solutions passed is not logical, and let me assure you, the rating change wont be more than 5 by those. Its not worth the trouble, and the contest was more than 95% fair. Not good to make it unrated due to bad 5% (25 Dec '17, 18:35) 1 Agreed @vijju123 PS: codechef isnt an avatar of god. It too can make mistakes. My sole motive was to bring this issue to notice of admins, not to make contest unrated. We dont know how it works behind the scenes of problem setting much (though i would like to for long challenge, sometime). (25 Dec '17, 21:17)
 0 Hey, this is my solution, I am getting a WA, using a two pointer method, similar solutions have passed, and I really have no clue where I'm going wrong. A brute checker also has been written if anyone wants to verify a case. Thanks in advance! answered 25 Dec '17, 19:54 2★addy007 1●1 accept rate: 0% Could u plz give link to those solution.. (25 Dec '17, 21:49)
 toggle preview community wiki:
Preview

By Email:

Markdown Basics

• *italic* or _italic_
• **bold** or __bold__
• image?![alt text](/path/img.jpg "title")
• numbered list: 1. Foo 2. Bar
• to add a line break simply add two spaces to where you would like the new line to be.
• basic HTML tags are also supported
• mathemetical formulas in Latex between \$ symbol

Question tags:

×134
×106
×74

question asked: 25 Dec '17, 00:52

question was seen: 3,801 times

last updated: 26 Dec '17, 22:50