?

Log in

No account? Create an account
3^3 - Queue — LiveJournal
May 25th, 2003
07:47 am

[Link]

Previous Entry Share Next Entry
3^3
Like prog, I hope to take advantage of advances in medicine. I used to say that I wanted to live to be 100. Maybe 4^4 isn't an unreasonable goal.

Here's hoping the Boggle tournament goes well. I made a program yesterday to do tournament seatings. Since I couldn't find any algorithms online anywhere for tournaments where more than two people play each other at once, I decided to just make random seatings. Then, I evaluated the different random seatings to make the number of times each person plays each other person closest to 1. Also, only some of the people are going to be sitting out one round, since there are 19 people and 10 rounds. I figure I'll just average everyone's places, whether they play 10 games or 9. I hope that everyone feels this is fair, since it's the only way I could figure doing it.

My next Perl project may be to make a module out of this tournament program, so people can figure out tournaments where more than two people play each other at once. I might also try scouring the Web some more for algorithms, or maybe ask around to math-types I know.

(4 comments | Leave a comment)

Comments
 
[User Picture]
From:bitty
Date:May 25th, 2003 05:08 am (UTC)
(Link)
You could do 5 tables of "four", where everyone sits at the three-person table exactly once.

Or 6 tables of "three," where everyone sits at the four-person table exactly once. Don't sit them out; just rotate through a special table instead.
[User Picture]
From:queue
Date:May 25th, 2003 05:46 am (UTC)
(Link)
I wanted to avoid different table sizes, since people might feel that was unfair for some reason. Like, in your second example, the one larger table might more heavily favor the people at the higher end of things, since the people at the lower end would have a chance of getting a 4th place, where the people at the higher end wouldn't. Or something. I dunno.

Also, I'm thinking it would be a bit more of a challenge to make sure that everyone sat at that table exactly once.

Of course, now that I'm thinking about it, I might have to play around with a program to do it. Hmm, I don't know if I'll have time, but I guess we'll see.
[User Picture]
From:bitty
Date:May 25th, 2003 05:52 am (UTC)
(Link)
I wanted to avoid different table sizes, since people might feel that was unfair for some reason. Like, in your second example, the one larger table might more heavily favor the people at the higher end of things, since the people at the lower end would have a chance of getting a 4th place, where the people at the higher end wouldn't.

right, which is why you rotate it so everyone's there once. sure, everyone has a table where they're more likely to get a lousy score, but everybody has that chance.
or you could always have #s 3 and 4 tie with a score fo 3.

or you go with the first scenario, in which everyone has an automatic better-than-fourth place finish.


don't mind me. i'm recovering from pizza.
[User Picture]
From:queue
Date:May 25th, 2003 06:51 am (UTC)
(Link)
Oh, wait. 19 is prime. I am not going to be able to have everyone play at the odd table exactly once.

Okay, I feel better about sticking with my original plan, now. :-)
My Website Powered by LiveJournal.com