Compilation of Plagiarism Concerns

Hello all,

I am delighted by the communities response and gesture towards the issue. Nothing is perfect, so its not very surprising if any one of us, out of all the million users, is able to come up with a better idea to deal with current issue.

We are dealing with @admin over how we can resolve, what can be done to provide most relief to users, while also not making things unfair for honest ones. If one of you guys has a nice solution to any of the problems faced by users, or any concerns or doubts, you can write them here at the thread.

For suggestions, you can also mail me at the id given at my profile. If its good enough, I can directly add it to the suggestion list to forward to @admin . Or you can also contact admins at help@codechef.com

Regards
Abhishek

3 Likes

The rating changes are capped with a max rating change computed as 100 + 75/(timesPlayed + 1) + 500*100/(|R-1500|+500). Due to this, maximum rating is capped up a limit of around 130 for users hit by plagiarism hammer. For such users solving one problem, 2 problems or all the problems causes same change in rating. If rating increment is around +130, it will take almost 5-6 months to regain the ratings, which a user will probably not prefer. He can make a new account silently and get the rating of 1775 in just one contest, which is illegal as per rules. But it will be difficult to identify such users and to identify such users is probably not the top priority. To make things fair so that the affected user need not create a new account, the above capping may be kept large enough (such as +400 or something like this) for users having less than 1000 rating and volatility factor may be increased so that the ratings can be regained in two months of hard work and at least a significant rating change are visible. Some of us may believe that this is unfair to hard working honest people. But what if a user creates a new account and starts performing well in the contests from the newly created illegal account with heavy increment in ratings. The ratings may not feature the better coder at the top. What we have achieved in the process is just a new account and to track such accounts is an overhead. The main motive is not fulfilled which is learning while competing.

My case wasn’t mentioned in the above article. I have been penalised because of the fast i/o reader which i copied from geeksforgeeks as i code in java. Many java users use the same i/o reader. What is @admin opinion regarding this @vijju123 .

Someone in Bangladesh copied my solution, i was using ideone
please look over this: CodeChef: Practical coding for everyone
@admin the guy who actually cheated was not punished however my ratings were dropped by 500 ??? the guy literally copy-pasted my code without even changing variable name :confused: also you can check my other submissions and you can see can easily notice that i often use #define li macro in my code, plus i submitted the code earlier

@Keshav2010 yes…actually same thing happened with me , in my case , someone in China copy-pasted my code from ideone …and yeah , you are right … i had submitted the code first and also all my codes too have a #define section which is unique in all my codes …
my solution and his solution

The max rating change is 100 + 75/(no of contest) + 50000/(1500-rating)
Isn’t this is very low max rating change for a user.
Even if he got 1st rank or 500 rank it is still the same for him. Secondly, if hit by a plagrism hammer, this takes a lot of time to get restored to actual rating the man worths.
Please Someone See to this.

2 Likes

Hey guys,

I know, a lot of you guys have been sending mails and concerns over it. A lot of good suggestions were given at discuss which I gave to @admin. A lot of you were worried about the progress, and asked me about it. At that time, I didnt have any concrete reply so I simple asked you to be patient - “we are looking into this issue.”

@admin thought a lot, and had a discussion with me along with @drpaveen to resolve this issue. I will include minutes-of-the-meet here.

Admin’s Initiation- @admin first explained to me why they applied the 0 rating rule. He said that there are a lot of people who made double accounts - submitting solutions from fake ones and submitting the final AC at the main one (perhaps to make their profile look good). Despite warnings to not to do so by @admin , they continued as no action (i.e rating drop) was happening. This cannot be encouraged! The agenda of the meeting decided was as follows-

  1. Discuss what to do about 0 rating people.
  2. Discuss about the rating penalties.

My Response: I understand the Point of View, but how well does this case represent cases up to national level? Just hearing this case, one would feel “They need very harsh punishments” , but if we look at other cases, we will see the punishment is too extreme. A case in point is the I/O template ones, where people claim that they got no reply.

Admin’s Response: Yes, we accept our fault regarding template cases. If theres any such case where templates were the reason of penalty, we will look into it and restore the rating at the earliest. This should not have happened. For these cases, we cannot rely on MOSS, manual intervention is needed. We will do everything we need to, to make sure these people get their ratings restored.

My opinion- If you have such a case pending, please forward the mail at help@codechef.com again so that its not missed out and speedy action is taken. @admin 's inbox has lakhs of mails which he might have to filter and read. Your little initiative can save you a lot of time, and will be convenient to @admin. The forwarded mail should contain all relevant parts, namely , Smruti’s mail saying you’re caught, and your replies. If was no reply from their side despite your timely presentation of arguments, they will immediately look into your case.

The next part was, about punishment.

My Point- The reduce rating to X is extremely harsh than reduce rating by X. Given that any 2 instances, over an indefinite period of time, are enough to reduce rating to 0 , this model can pose multiple problems and dissatisfaction especially if users arent getting reply to their plagiarism mails and/or if genuine users are punished.

Admin’s Point- He explained to me various factors about his decision and what prompted him to do so. Some factors discussed were, their need to punish regular cheaters severely (the punishment must dissuade them). We discussed other models like those followed by CF. Some constraints were like- they need to avoid frequent recalculation of ratings for timely and speedy update of ratings after contest (which gives another constraint on “trade-off between rating updation and time given to user to reply back with their justification” [if CF model were to be followed])

My Argument- The rating of change to X must be fixed. It should ideally be “reduce by” a fix value than “reduce to” 0. For those with 0 rating, we can give them a ‘boast’ like +800 or +1000 to allow them a sensible recovery. Reduce rating to 0 also encourages multiple accounts.

A detailed discussion then followed. Admin said that currently users are sticking to their old accounts despite 0 rating, and inquired me about it. I responded that its because I assured them that we will look into it, and that they believe @admin will give a fair solution in the end. Admin asked then, why in my opinion, reduce by X doesnt encourage multiple accounts- to which I cited that “A user has affection for his hard work he did to build his profile. A -500 wont cause him to throw it away his account. But a reduce to 0 means he is better starting off with a new one, as it will take him almost half a year to just reach 1500 at a optimistic rate of +100-130 per contest.” Admin seems to have taken the suggestion well :slight_smile:

Final Consensus- We decided that the punishment could be changed to something like "For first contest, reduce rating by 500. Increase it per contest the user is caught in future ( upto a max of -800 per plagiarism contest). If after that he reaches 0 rating, then he is on his own. This was, very agreeable to me as well, as its a lot better than reduce to 0 at very 2nd instance, allows for a possible recovery as well. For the users currently at 0 rating, @admin will give something like +K to allow a possible recovery. Exact numbers will be decided by @admin. Do forward your previous mails to them if you are one of the users belonging to this case! For people with double account, its entirely on mercy of @admin. This is one practice he severely wants to discourage. He expresses his hope that this instance will cause such things not to be repeated in future.

We also discussed various measures we can take regarding no reply to plagiarism mails. The problem is, the workload of it is too much for a few people to handle, as they get thousands of mails regarding this topic. He had thought over it and gave his suggestion. He proposed to make this step public, by a thread on discuss or some portal on codechef website. This will increase transparency. Anyone caught will be required to give arguments and justification there, and he hopes that the community will extend whatever help it could to assist @admin in discharging of this duty.I responded positively, as it makes the process transparent. At last, admin assured more community and/or mod involvement in their process so that things go smoothly for the community. He expressed how important the community and ethics are for them, and with that we concluded the discussion.

A blog will be put up by them soon to communicate the final decisions.

This was the crux of it. It wasnt as short as I described above, a lot of discussion, arguments and concerns (which you guys sent me) were exchanged to get to the most constructive solution. I am just telling the crux of it- the actual discussion lasted for over half an hour XD.

3 Likes

@vijju123 you didn,t told what admin decided to do on the rating change per contest for those who are recovering from 0 you only said that admin will provide +K because if +K is not enough then it will take almost half an year really to recover the old ratings

@vijju123

where is your +K thing? it would take almost half a year to recover the ratings. they are not even considering the performance, just randomly giving +135 to +140 rating points.

Updates as requested by the community-

  • The script for +K rating is almost done. Users can expect it to be done very soon. @admin is hoping for it to be done by today or tomorrow.
  • Penalties are being revised. The “Drop rating to 0” is being replaced. I can comment exact numbers only when its finished, but they are tending to keep penalties at an at least -750
  • Making the process transparent is initiated. It can take some time. A rough deadline is end of this month (but may be extended if some unforeseen difficulty comes up). We’ll inform about that.

Hello all,

I am extremely delighted to inform you that as per our discussion with @admin , the concerned changes have been implemented! Please check your profile, and read about the changes Important announcement concerning rating changes following plagiarism | CodeChef .

No More Mercy will be done for any further case of 0 rating so please keep fair play in mind when you give contest next time. Also, the rule of "Change rating to 0 has been replaced by Reduce rating by X

Please give @admin your feedback at the blog. If I am needed, do tell me. Thank you for having faith and trust on your moderators. :slight_smile:

https://discuss.codechef.com/questions/126736/bug-in-rating-change/126869

Negotiating with @admin over this.

Pinged @admin to see that.

I was plagiarised twice. According to the rules, I should've been penalized with a deduction of 1500 rating points, but my ratings were reduced to zero.

Read point 8. Did it not satisfy the doubt?

Also, the volatility issues of users with 0 rating participating in MAY18 experienced very low rating increment. When will the rating update?

I dont think rating increment was in the plan. It was, afaik, applicable from next contest onwards.

Cook-off is due tomorrow, is the volatility issue resolved

They are experimenting and trying things.

I think you mailed me. I had a look then, and I said to mail them back. If I recall correctly, you missed the time frame. As in, the sole decision depends on @admin and I have no say there. Sorry :frowning:

any updates…@vijju123.

@abhineet14 I see, thanks for the info.Maybe when contestant gets penalty of plagiarism the no. of contests can be made 1 again?(I know this is hoping too much; but considering it is reasonable to give me and others in similar position better rating) :slight_smile:

1 Like

If there is a problem, be assured that we are working with @admin to fix it.

Pinged @admin