You are not logged in.

- Topics: Active | Unanswered

**Devantè****Real Member**- Registered: 2006-07-14
- Posts: 6,400

Devanté wrote:

Got 1.635 for double subtraction.

But it says 9 out of 10 because my finger slipped on the last question. I ended up putting 67 instead of 57. :'(

I don't think I can beat 1.635...my second best score is 1.697 s for average.

EDIT: 1.643 is now my second best time.

I can now always get 1.6xx for double subtraction.

EDIT: Just got 1.611, my best score for double subtraction yet.

Woot, 1.563. I think it is possible to get under 1.5 average s.

*Last edited by Devanté (2006-12-20 09:55:48)*

Offline

**mikau****Member**- Registered: 2005-08-22
- Posts: 1,504

See if anyone can beat this score!!

Single addition, 10 problems, an average of 0.492!

That mode is fun because the challange comes not from the math, but from how quickly you can hit the keys. When you use the keypad its a lot like "wack a' mole"

My goal was to get my average speed under 0.5 and it took me a while to do it.

I betcha YOU can't beat that!

A logarithm is just a misspelled algorithm.

Offline

**Devantè****Real Member**- Registered: 2006-07-14
- Posts: 6,400

I cannot get past 1.6 seconds again...even though my top score is 1.563. (these scores are for double subtraction)

It is all really based on probability. Sometimes you can get a set of difficult problems and osmetimes you might get a bunch of subtraction problems you could practically *whiz* through.

Offline

**mikau****Member**- Registered: 2005-08-22
- Posts: 1,504

you also get grooves, hot streakes and cold streaks!

A logarithm is just a misspelled algorithm.

Offline

**Devantè****Real Member**- Registered: 2006-07-14
- Posts: 6,400

Yep. Also, I vote for the highscore board, it would save time and posts if we didn't have to picture-prove our times all the time.

Offline

**Devantè****Real Member**- Registered: 2006-07-14
- Posts: 6,400

Just got 1.512 seconds average for double subtraction...

Offline

**MathsIsFun****Administrator**- Registered: 2005-01-21
- Posts: 7,611

I think I could make a high-scores function. The data would be stored on the server.

But for it to be worthwhile we would need a "competition standard" event - like 50 questions, and some way of ensuring an "average" run of questions (not all easy or hard). Any ideas?

"The physicists defer only to mathematicians, and the mathematicians defer only to God ..." - Leon M. Lederman

Offline

**Toast****Real Member**- Registered: 2006-10-08
- Posts: 1,321

Then there is a problem: if you get questions incorrect, would they count towards the scoreboard? It is not that easy to get all 50 questions correct, due to rushing, fingers slipping etc.

*Last edited by Toast (2006-12-21 00:41:14)*

Offline

**mathsyperson****Moderator**- Registered: 2005-06-22
- Posts: 4,900

MathsIsFun wrote:

I think I could make a high-scores function. The data would be stored on the server.

But for it to be worthwhile we would need a "competition standard" event - like 50 questions, and some way of ensuring an "average" run of questions (not all easy or hard). Any ideas?

As the amount of questions increase, then the overall difficulty of the questions would balance itself out anyway. So I think bumping the amount up to 50 or some similar amount would solve that problem at the same time.

Toast: Maybe for every wrong question, you get a 2-second penalty? So it's clearly a bad thing to get, but it also wouldn't completely wreck your time just because of one slip.

Why did the vector cross the road?

It wanted to be normal.

Offline

**Devantè****Real Member**- Registered: 2006-07-14
- Posts: 6,400

New time: 1.476 for double subtraction. Strange, the questions don't really look randomised...

Offline

**mikau****Member**- Registered: 2005-08-22
- Posts: 1,504

you da man, devente!

A logarithm is just a misspelled algorithm.

Offline

**Toast****Real Member**- Registered: 2006-10-08
- Posts: 1,321

Wow 1.476, I can't get anywhere below 2.5

Offline

**Devantè****Real Member**- Registered: 2006-07-14
- Posts: 6,400

mikau wrote:

you da man, devente!

You too, Mikeu!

In order to get below 2.5 you must use the method that I posted in the subtraction thread.

Offline

**mikau****Member**- Registered: 2005-08-22
- Posts: 1,504

oops.. sorry ebout thet.

A logarithm is just a misspelled algorithm.

Offline

**Devantè****Real Member**- Registered: 2006-07-14
- Posts: 6,400

Hehe, it doesn't metter.

I still agree with the highscore board, though. It would be nice for some competition.

Offline

**Toast****Real Member**- Registered: 2006-10-08
- Posts: 1,321

I think this game deserves more attention, and possibly a front page berth. I mean... guests can't access this forum and hence the link, and I can't seem to find the game on the A-Z listings.

Offline

**MathsIsFun****Administrator**- Registered: 2005-01-21
- Posts: 7,611

It is now in the search database. Try Math is Fun Search and the word "reaction"

I am currently working on a "Math Trainer"

"The physicists defer only to mathematicians, and the mathematicians defer only to God ..." - Leon M. Lederman

Offline

**Devantè****Real Member**- Registered: 2006-07-14
- Posts: 6,400

Ah, perfection. It feels so good.

So, what will this 'Math Trainer' be like? What I am suggesting is that it be similar to our huge project we are making. If not then we could probably merge the two. We could probably train a person using the game in maths. We start from 'Level 1', the most basic level. That will be the addition, subtraction, multiplication and division stuff. Then we could have people advancing in levels so they get up to 'Level 110' or something where trigonometry or calculus starts to be used. That would probably be better suited for our 'MacArthur Foundation' game, however.

Offline

**Toast****Real Member**- Registered: 2006-10-08
- Posts: 1,321

Devanté wrote:

Ah, perfection. It feels so good.

So, what will this 'Math Trainer' be like? What I am suggesting is that it be similar to our huge project we are making. If not then we could probably merge the two. We could probably train a person using the game in maths. We start from 'Level 1', the most basic level. That will be the addition, subtraction, multiplication and division stuff. Then we could have people advancing in levels so they get up to 'Level 110' or something where trigonometry or calculus starts to be used. That would probably be better suited for our 'MacArthur Foundation' game, however.

About the MacArthur Foundation, do you actually have to have the finished game to present or just a plan of what you're going to do? After all the money will actually go into developing the game, right? So... we only need a plan?

I wish I could help in some way... don't know anything about programming tho...

Offline

**MathsIsFun****Administrator**- Registered: 2005-01-21
- Posts: 7,611

I doubt they will give us any money - I think they mostly give it to researchers at Universities.

Anything we do will be up to us, and at the current rate will be very slow.

If you want to help ... ideas are good.

(BTW: If I found a good, and inexpensive, developer, I would pay them myself.)

"The physicists defer only to mathematicians, and the mathematicians defer only to God ..." - Leon M. Lederman

Offline

**Toast****Real Member**- Registered: 2006-10-08
- Posts: 1,321

I found this method for fast multiplication on the web. What do you think of it?

http://www.metacafe.com/watch/315070/cool_math_trick_really_fast_multiplication/

Offline

**mathsyperson****Moderator**- Registered: 2005-06-22
- Posts: 4,900

I knew this method already. It's basically just normal long multiplication but with some of the steps combined to make things a bit quicker. It is very useful though, although for some examples, a different method would be quicker.

Why did the vector cross the road?

It wanted to be normal.

Offline

**Devantè****Real Member**- Registered: 2006-07-14
- Posts: 6,400

Yeah, same here. It is quite useful in desperate times.

Offline

**rida****Real Member**- Registered: 2006-09-25
- Posts: 839

For some reason when I was doing add single it said 8+1=9 is wrong.

Dreams don't come true, you gotta make them come true.

Offline

**mathsyperson****Moderator**- Registered: 2005-06-22
- Posts: 4,900

Are you sure that you didn't just accidentally type 8 or 0? I've never seen it get its own sums wrong like that before. Did it just happen once or is it being consistent?

Why did the vector cross the road?

It wanted to be normal.

Offline