vlad7777
Dec 23, 2014
Undergraduate / Common App - 'three problems solved, one remaining...' - challenged a belief or idea essay [3]
Hey!
Please, tell me what you think about this common app essay. I would be glad if you could point out mistakes.
Reflect on a time when you challenged a belief or idea. What prompted you to act? Would you make the same decision again?
Three problems solved, one remaining, the hardest of all. Two hours I spend trying different ideas, but nothing fits. Then, click, and idea comes up "I should divide the whole area into small rectangles!" Meticulous checking follows: algorithms complexity - fits into the time limit, worst case scenario - works, extreme tests - no error, memory consumption - almost reaches the limit, but still works. I realize that here it is, the correct solution! My fingers start flying over the keyboard typing in hundreds of symbols that after several minutes unite into one running program. The next hour I spend restlessly eliminating numerous errors in the three hundred lines of code. Finally, it is done, five hours of brainstorming in front of a screen come to an end, I come out of the computer laboratory, with sweat rolling down my forehead. "I did it, solved that abominable task", I thought. It is the regional Olympiad in Informatics. 70 students from different cities of Brest region came to take part in this contest. I participate in this contest for the fourth time, everyone knows me here, even the committee members shake hands with me, yet I am nervous. Another couple of hours of impatient waiting and finally committee shows us the preliminary results.
I can't believe my eyes at first - the problem I have been working on for four out of five hours earned me 0 points. I am on the second place, it is quite good, but I am not pleased with the fact that I wasted so much effort for nothing. We begin self-evaluation - the process when participants run their own solutions on different tests to see if the committee's results are correct. Everything seems right, I run the checker provided by the committee from Minsk, and it shows the notorious "0 points" for my state of art solution. Seeing my desperation, a member of the committee comes up to me, lays his hand on my shoulder and says "You are quite good even without it, don't be upset, you still qualify for the National Olympiad." No, I won't give up that easily, I need to know what is wrong. I open the source code, compile, run. The first test is solved correctly! I must have at least 5 points out of 100. I quickly code my own simple checker - surprise, I have 18 out of 20 tests correct, it amounts to 90 points. That is interesting; I immediately start filling the appeal for reevaluation. Members of the committee gather around my table, they are making sure that the checker is incorrect. After they checked everything themselves, they started calling the committees of other five regions. As it turns out, others have bad checkers too. An hour more of waiting, and here I see my appeal - "satisfied" is signed by the committee. Ninety more points were enough to get me to the first place. Apart from that, it probably helped some other students from other regions to get fair results.
This occasion taught me not to give up in search for truth and to always be courageous enough to doubt opinions or facts that are often deemed unquestionable. My little investigation was duly rewarded, but what would have happened if I hadn't decided to check the solution on my own? I could have simply accepted the fact that I have zero points. Well, for me nothing would have changed actually, but I would have thought I had made a stupid mistake (which I did anyway, it is 90 out 100, 2 tests are wrong). However, some other kid in another region may have been unfairly judged and, as a result, not allowed to participate in the National Olympiad in Informatics.
The kind of curiosity that incited me to act on this contest helps me a lot in learning computer science - I always go on until I find the error in my algorithms. In my search I often find out some tricky features of algorithms. Also, it is a great way to learn a new algorithm - implementing it and trying to find mistakes. This way I quickly learn the details of an algorithms, I start to understand its mechanics.
Hey!
Please, tell me what you think about this common app essay. I would be glad if you could point out mistakes.
Reflect on a time when you challenged a belief or idea. What prompted you to act? Would you make the same decision again?
Three problems solved, one remaining, the hardest of all. Two hours I spend trying different ideas, but nothing fits. Then, click, and idea comes up "I should divide the whole area into small rectangles!" Meticulous checking follows: algorithms complexity - fits into the time limit, worst case scenario - works, extreme tests - no error, memory consumption - almost reaches the limit, but still works. I realize that here it is, the correct solution! My fingers start flying over the keyboard typing in hundreds of symbols that after several minutes unite into one running program. The next hour I spend restlessly eliminating numerous errors in the three hundred lines of code. Finally, it is done, five hours of brainstorming in front of a screen come to an end, I come out of the computer laboratory, with sweat rolling down my forehead. "I did it, solved that abominable task", I thought. It is the regional Olympiad in Informatics. 70 students from different cities of Brest region came to take part in this contest. I participate in this contest for the fourth time, everyone knows me here, even the committee members shake hands with me, yet I am nervous. Another couple of hours of impatient waiting and finally committee shows us the preliminary results.
I can't believe my eyes at first - the problem I have been working on for four out of five hours earned me 0 points. I am on the second place, it is quite good, but I am not pleased with the fact that I wasted so much effort for nothing. We begin self-evaluation - the process when participants run their own solutions on different tests to see if the committee's results are correct. Everything seems right, I run the checker provided by the committee from Minsk, and it shows the notorious "0 points" for my state of art solution. Seeing my desperation, a member of the committee comes up to me, lays his hand on my shoulder and says "You are quite good even without it, don't be upset, you still qualify for the National Olympiad." No, I won't give up that easily, I need to know what is wrong. I open the source code, compile, run. The first test is solved correctly! I must have at least 5 points out of 100. I quickly code my own simple checker - surprise, I have 18 out of 20 tests correct, it amounts to 90 points. That is interesting; I immediately start filling the appeal for reevaluation. Members of the committee gather around my table, they are making sure that the checker is incorrect. After they checked everything themselves, they started calling the committees of other five regions. As it turns out, others have bad checkers too. An hour more of waiting, and here I see my appeal - "satisfied" is signed by the committee. Ninety more points were enough to get me to the first place. Apart from that, it probably helped some other students from other regions to get fair results.
This occasion taught me not to give up in search for truth and to always be courageous enough to doubt opinions or facts that are often deemed unquestionable. My little investigation was duly rewarded, but what would have happened if I hadn't decided to check the solution on my own? I could have simply accepted the fact that I have zero points. Well, for me nothing would have changed actually, but I would have thought I had made a stupid mistake (which I did anyway, it is 90 out 100, 2 tests are wrong). However, some other kid in another region may have been unfairly judged and, as a result, not allowed to participate in the National Olympiad in Informatics.
The kind of curiosity that incited me to act on this contest helps me a lot in learning computer science - I always go on until I find the error in my algorithms. In my search I often find out some tricky features of algorithms. Also, it is a great way to learn a new algorithm - implementing it and trying to find mistakes. This way I quickly learn the details of an algorithms, I start to understand its mechanics.
