Thread: Match Scheduling Algorithm Competition
View Single Post
  #47   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 03-10-2011, 12:19
gblake's Avatar
gblake gblake is offline
6th Gear Developer; Mentor
AKA: Blake Ross
no team (6th Gear)
Team Role: Mentor
  
Join Date: May 2006
Rookie Year: 2006
Location: Virginia
Posts: 1,943
gblake has a reputation beyond reputegblake has a reputation beyond reputegblake has a reputation beyond reputegblake has a reputation beyond reputegblake has a reputation beyond reputegblake has a reputation beyond reputegblake has a reputation beyond reputegblake has a reputation beyond reputegblake has a reputation beyond reputegblake has a reputation beyond reputegblake has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Match Scheduling Algorithm Competition
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnr View Post
Would it be possible to run two sets of matches? First day would be random and second day would be based on first day results. Please understand i have no knowledge of programming and was just thinking outloud.
The software can be written pretty easily to do just about anything that isn't completely insane, and that is actually achievable/feasible given the number of teams, matches, and user-defined attributes.

I am comfortable saying this because for modern computers, there just aren't all that many ways to combine 16 to 128 teams, in 4 or 6 team matches. No human would want deal with all the combinations, while juggling a bunch of screwy attributes, to create a schedule; but our computers are fast, tireless, accurate, and don't complain about doing boring, repetitive calculations for us.

So.... the central question in this case isn't whether a computer program can be written to accomplish the task. The question is whether the humans specifying what the program's instructions should accomplish, can ever agree on what they would want the program to do.

Echoing Eric's sentiments: Compared to agreeing on the requirements for, and then properly specifying, the algorithm, the coding will be the easy part.

Blake
__________________
Blake Ross, For emailing me, in the verizon.net domain, I am blake
VRC Team Mentor, FTC volunteer, 5th Gear Developer, Husband, Father, Triangle Fraternity Alumnus (ky 76), U Ky BSEE, Tau Beta Pi, Eta Kappa Nu, Kentucky Colonel
Words/phrases I avoid: basis, mitigate, leveraging, transitioning, impact (instead of affect/effect), facilitate, programmatic, problematic, issue (instead of problem), latency (instead of delay), dependency (instead of prerequisite), connectivity, usage & utilize (instead of use), downed, functionality, functional, power on, descore, alumni (instead of alumnus/alumna), the enterprise, methodology, nomenclature, form factor (instead of size or shape), competency, modality, provided(with), provision(ing), irregardless/irrespective, signage, colorized, pulsating, ideate
Last edited by gblake : 03-10-2011 at 12:22.
Reply With Quote