Just a thought, but some/most of the interesting math problems require an ability to write out proofs. This is something that I loved about Abstract Algebra. Not only is there an ability to come up with a correct answer, but the *process* of deriving the answer is just as important. Brilliant could accommodate it via peer-reviewed evaluation of submitted proofs. The evaluation could be based on simple criteria that would be scored in binary yes/no in the proof written:

- Conclusion is correct: yes/no.
- Mistakes in any step: yes/no
- Logical flow: yes/no
- Other criteria? Custom criteria? yes/no

To build this, we'd need a way to write and store the proofs, however that architecture already exists.

The bigger change would be with user profiles. Perhaps if you are Level 2 in Induction, then you are able to peer-review a Level 1 or a Level 2 question in that topic. After enough peer-reviews, an average score is determined for the person that submitted the proof. Reviewers are rewarded by earning points or badges, similar to how StackOverFlow works.

I think it can be done.

No vote yet

1 vote

×

Problem Loading...

Note Loading...

Set Loading...

Easy Math Editor

`*italics*`

or`_italics_`

italics`**bold**`

or`__bold__`

boldNote: you must add a full line of space before and after lists for them to show up correctlyparagraph 1

paragraph 2

`[example link](https://brilliant.org)`

`> This is a quote`

Remember to wrap math in \( ... \) or \[ ... \] to ensure proper formatting.`2 \times 3`

`2^{34}`

`a_{i-1}`

`\frac{2}{3}`

`\sqrt{2}`

`\sum_{i=1}^3`

`\sin \theta`

`\boxed{123}`

## Comments

Sort by:

TopNewestHi Greg,

I am certainly interested in being able to host math proofs and have them be graded. It is a slightly long process, of which we have already taken some steps towards. For example, we ask people to submit solutions, and they do get peer-reviewed by the rest of the community. It currently isn't such a formal "here is a report for how you did", in part because we want to keep Brilliant fun, as opposed to "oh, another school presentation that I have to do, and hoops that I have to jump through".

Because this approach isn't standard, we will likely tackle it in multiple stages, responding according to how people actually end up using it. I hope that everyone is like you, and excited by this possibility

Log in to reply

It's a good approach to do it in stages. I get the jumping through hoops thing. But, I'm pretty sure the community would enjoy it. The structure wouldn't be any different to how you've done it with the "reveal solution" functionality you have currently, with up-voting on good ones, and it's clear that this format is already successful. Most of the proofs I see are well-written (by teenagers, no less). What I suggested above is actually much more complicated than it would need to be, on second thought. Anyways... glad you're looking into it.

Log in to reply