Waste less time on Facebook — follow Brilliant.
×

Levels on brilliant

Well this thought arose from a small psychological problem i had a few days ago. I reached Level 5 on Conbinatorics and suddenly found that my zeal for solving problems (specially the computational ones) decreased a bit. As long as i was on level 4 i had an apetite for level 5 but now that was gone.

This apart i think level 4 and 5 have far more ranges than to be covered in two levels. So i think they can be organized into some more Levels increasing the number to , say , 7?

Please @Calvin and other staff pay a heed to this. And others may share their views. thank you.

Note by Chandrachur Banerjee
2 years, 1 month ago

No vote yet
1 vote

Comments

Sort by:

Top Newest

Thanks for your feedback.

We are currently not inclined to increasing the number of levels. Increasing the number of levels will not resolve the issue that you brought up, merely delay it. Calvin Lin Staff · 2 years, 1 month ago

Log in to reply

@Calvin Lin If u r talking of the psycological problem then i must say that it was kind of a joke. I am actually concerned to the great variety of problems that abound in just 2 levels. Chandrachur Banerjee · 2 years, 1 month ago

Log in to reply

@Chandrachur Banerjee I'm sorry, I'm having trouble understanding what your issue is.

  1. You're concerned that there is a great variety of problems and you want fewer problems?
  2. You want more "purely computational" problems that Wolfram Alpha will solve for you?

Could you rephrase your statements / this note for clarity? Calvin Lin Staff · 2 years, 1 month ago

Log in to reply

@Calvin Lin Sorry sir, but you seem to have misinterpreted me all the way.(: What i said is that Level 4 and 5 have a great variety of problems with great variations of difficulty levels among them. For example in Level 5 there are problems which can be solved with moderate expertise as well as some really superhard problems. So its somewhat unfair to categorize all of them just under one level. this is the main reason for my post. Is it clear now?? Chandrachur Banerjee · 2 years, 1 month ago

Log in to reply

@Chandrachur Banerjee And with due respect to you may i ask which part of my post prompted you to ,(of course)insult me with the ominous word WOLFRUMALPHA. Sorry but thats really an insult. Chandrachur Banerjee · 2 years, 1 month ago

Log in to reply

@Chandrachur Banerjee Thanks for the clarification. That was not obvious from the note written at the start.
Level 5 is intended to contain all of those problems, and I currently do not see significant benefit in spreading them out much further.


As I said, I was trying to understand what your issue is. There were multiple ways to interpret what you were saying, especially after throwing in the conditional of "If u r talking of the psycological problem then i must say that it was kind of a joke." Unfortunately, I am not (yet) a mind reader, and hence I do not know exactly what you were trying to say (even if you think you have a clear perception of it in your mind). That is why I was offering various interpretations of what the issue was.

I was trying to figure out what "and suddenly found that my zeal for solving problems (specially the computational ones) decreased a bit" meant. Amongst the numerous scenarios that I can come up with are:
1. "At level 4, 5, there are fewer computational ones. This prevents me from increasing my rating, hence my zeal for them decreased".
2. "Once I got better, I was more interested in proof based questions than those which merely required computations, hence my zeal for them decreased".
3. "When I saw that I was already at the top (level 5), there was no point in getter better, hence my zeal decreased.".

My original response, was to point number 3. I didn't think point number 2 was relevant in your case (but was equally confused by far more ranges), and so I was left with point number 1. Calvin Lin Staff · 2 years, 1 month ago

Log in to reply

@Calvin Lin U r rt sir. going through my org note again from a stranger's viewpoint i realize its difficult to interpret.Sorry for everything. Chandrachur Banerjee · 2 years, 1 month ago

Log in to reply

Then go for having the most number of problems solved on brilliant. Rajarshi Chatterjee · 2 years, 1 month ago

Log in to reply

@Rajarshi Chatterjee I don't think thats a good indicator. One can solve numerous easy problems and increase the number. Talk of quality indicators. Chandrachur Banerjee · 2 years, 1 month ago

Log in to reply

@Chandrachur Banerjee brian charlesworth, i am sorry if the name is somewhat wrong,has most number of problems solved on brilliant . No body has not yet gone past him. So you may try to if you can even by solving easy problems. Rajarshi Chatterjee · 2 years, 1 month ago

Log in to reply

@Rajarshi Chatterjee Maybe its boring to score by solving easy, maybe no one would actually do it. Still that can't be a good indicator. Chandrachur Banerjee · 2 years, 1 month ago

Log in to reply

×

Problem Loading...

Note Loading...

Set Loading...