Overhaul Fewest Moves #678

lgarron · 2018-12-18T21:49:18Z

Clean up the structure.
Define "information to identify the attempt" (E2c1): name or WCA ID, and optionally comp/round/attempt #.
Specify when outside competitor may write information to identify the attempt:
- Before the attempt. (E2a1)
- During the attempt (implicit)
- While turning in a solution, in front of the judge. (E2c1+)
- NOT after turning in a solution. (E2c1+)
Define an unambiguous, valid solution. (E2c2 to E2c5)
Specify that a competitor should black out/scribble out extra moves. (E2c3) (This is a
"should", but placing it in the Regulations will hopefully encourage
competitors to do this move consistently, leading to fewer frustrating calls
while grading).
Allow judges to interpret {r}, <r>, or (r) as [r] for inexperienced competitors. (E2c2++)

- Clean up the structure. - Specify when the competitor may write their name: - Before the attempt. - While turning in a solution, in fron of the judge. - NOT after turning in a solution. - Define an unambiguous, valid solution. - Specify that a competitor should scribble out extra moves. (This is a "should", but placing it in the Regulations will hopefully encourage competitors to do this move consistently, leading to fewer frustrating calls while grading). Note that this does *not* address parentheses in solutions, which will be in a separate PR.

lgarron · 2018-12-18T21:56:40Z

@Laura-O, would you mind reviewing this change?
(Or asking someone else to, if you won't have time during the next day?)

@thewca/wrc-team: this is a pretty substantial overhaul, so I'd appreciate a review from anyone who has input!

…ns in rotation moves.

wca-guidelines.md

AlbertoPdRF

A comment and a nitpick, but overall LGTM!

wca-guidelines.md

AlbertoPdRF · 2018-12-19T08:13:52Z

wca-guidelines.md

+- E2c1++) [EXPLANATION] The competitor is not required to submit a paper with the competition name, round, and/or attempt number, but may wish to do so in order to help the organization team keep track of submitted solutions.
+- E2c1+++) [ADDITION] If a judge finds a solution without a information to identify the attempt after the competitor has finished submitting it (e.g. while grading the attempt), they should find out the competitor who wrote the solution in order to assign them a DNF (rather than DNS). Note that the competitor must not be allowed to write information to identify the attempt at this point, so they must receive a DNF result.
+- E2c2+) [EXAMPLE] Examples that are not considered a single unambiguous move sequence: multiple solution sequences without exactly one clearly indicated solution, a solution with ambiguous symbols (e.g. a letter that looks similar to "B" and "R" but is not clearly one or the other), a solution with stars or long arrows indicating moves to be performed out of written order (e.g. "insertions" that are not written in-line with the rest of the move sequence, "pre-moves" that are not incorporated into the move sequence using valid notation), a move sequence that is not written out roughly as a series of lines in reading order, any arrangement of symbols that cannot be interpreted as an unambiguous move sequence. Exceptions to the examples above: small typographic corrections (e.g. blacking out a move and writing a move above that is clearly meant to replace it, moves written in subscript or superscript to fit between other moves).
+ - E2c2++) [ADDITION] If a competitor with little 3x3x3 Fewest Moves experience uses the incorrect type of brackets/parentheses to write a rotation, the judge may interpret the competitor's intention as the correct brackets (and the competitor should be informed), at the discretion of the Delegate. Example: {r}, <r>, or (r) may be interpreted as [r]. Note that only the bracket type may reinterpreted this way, and notation such as or [R], [r u], or [r]2 is still considered invalid (see [Guideline E2c4+](guidelines:guideline:E2c4+)).


Suggested change

- E2c2++) [ADDITION] If a competitor with little 3x3x3 Fewest Moves experience uses the incorrect type of brackets/parentheses to write a rotation, the judge may interpret the competitor's intention as the correct brackets (and the competitor should be informed), at the discretion of the Delegate. Example: {r}, <r>, or (r) may be interpreted as [r]. Note that only the bracket type may reinterpreted this way, and notation such as or [R], [r u], or [r]2 is still considered invalid (see [Guideline E2c4+](guidelines:guideline:E2c4+)).

- E2c2++) [ADDITION] If a competitor with little 3x3x3 Fewest Moves experience uses the incorrect type of brackets/parentheses to write a rotation, the judge may interpret the competitor's intention as the correct brackets (and the competitor should be informed), at the discretion of the WCA Delegate. Example: {r}, <r>, or (r) may be interpreted as [r]. Note that only the bracket type may reinterpreted this way, and notation such as or [R], [r u], or [r]2 is still considered invalid (see [Guideline E2c4+](guidelines:guideline:E2c4+)).

Also, that's quite unclear: what is little experience?
I would suggest to either remove it completely (i.e. allow it for all competitors) or using the same term as in A7g (caused by a new competitor's inexperience).

I'd really like to avoid implying that it's okay to use invalid notation.
I've changed this to "due to inexperience".

wca-guidelines.md

Laura-O · 2018-12-19T10:25:19Z

wca-guidelines.md

+- E2c1++) [EXPLANATION] The competitor is not required to submit a paper with the competition name, round, and/or attempt number, but may wish to do so in order to help the organization team keep track of submitted solutions.
+- E2c1+++) [ADDITION] If a judge finds a solution without a information to identify the attempt after the competitor has finished submitting it (e.g. while grading the attempt), they should find out the competitor who wrote the solution in order to assign them a DNF (rather than DNS). Note that the competitor must not be allowed to write information to identify the attempt at this point, so they must receive a DNF result.
+- E2c2+) [EXAMPLE] Examples that are not considered a single unambiguous move sequence: multiple solution sequences without exactly one clearly indicated solution, a solution with ambiguous symbols (e.g. a letter that looks similar to "B" and "R" but is not clearly one or the other), a solution with stars or long arrows indicating moves to be performed out of written order (e.g. "insertions" that are not written in-line with the rest of the move sequence, "pre-moves" that are not incorporated into the move sequence using valid notation), a move sequence that is not written out roughly as a series of lines in reading order, any arrangement of symbols that cannot be interpreted as an unambiguous move sequence. Exceptions to the examples above: small typographic corrections (e.g. blacking out a move and writing a move above that is clearly meant to replace it, moves written in subscript or superscript to fit between other moves).
+ - E2c2++) [ADDITION] If a competitor with little 3x3x3 Fewest Moves experience uses the incorrect type of brackets/parentheses to write a rotation, the judge may interpret the competitor's intention as the correct brackets (and the competitor should be informed), at the discretion of the Delegate. Example: {r}, <r>, or (r) may be interpreted as [r]. Note that only the bracket type may reinterpreted this way, and notation such as or [R], [r u], or [r]2 is still considered invalid (see [Guideline E2c4+](guidelines:guideline:E2c4+)).


Also, that's quite unclear: what is little experience?
I would suggest to either remove it completely (i.e. allow it for all competitors) or using the same term as in A7g (caused by a new competitor's inexperience).

lgarron · 2018-12-19T15:59:50Z

@Laura-O, could you review again? :-D

wca-guidelines.md

SAuroux · 2018-12-19T17:32:46Z

wca-regulations.md

    - E2b) All competitors have a total time limit of 60 minutes to find and write a solution.
        - E2b1) The judge should call "5 MINUTES REMAINING" at 55 minutes, and must call "STOP" at 60 minutes.
-    - E2c) At 60 minutes, each competitor must submit to the judge a single piece of paper with the competitor's written name (optionally accompanied by WCA ID) and solution, using the notation for the 3x3x3 Cube described in [Regulation 12a](regulations:regulation:12a). Penalty: disqualification of the attempt (DNF).
+    - E2c) At 60 minutes, each competitor must submit to the judge a single piece of paper with a written solution and information to identify the attempt.
+        - E2c1) Information to identify the attempt is: the competitor's name or WCA ID (at least one, optionally both), and optionally the competition name, round, and/or attempt number. Penalty for a submitted solution without a name or WCA ID: disqualification of the attempt (DNF).


Technically, "name" is quite ambiguous. Surely, we cannot require the exact WCA names (local names, Brazilians, etc.). Out of curiosity, which of the following "names" would you consider valid for myself: "S. Auroux", "Sébastien A.", "Sébastien", "Séb".

I think specifying this not particularly useful. A competitor who wants to get a valid result will write a sufficiently clear name, and I don't see this as a useful avenue for cheating. Open to suggestions, though!

SAuroux · 2018-12-19T23:34:13Z

I'm a little lost regarding writing identity information while turning in a solution, in front of the judge. Unless I am missing something, this is currently no longer included/planned?

lgarron · 2018-12-20T00:34:52Z

I'm a little lost regarding writing identity information while turning in a solution, in front of the judge. Unless I am missing something, this is currently no longer included/planned?

Looks like I lost E2c1+ somewhere in one of the draft commits; thanks for noticing. 😳

I've added it back.

campos20 · 2018-12-20T02:26:28Z

[perhaps this isn't the place?] I'm not particularly crazy about how we allow movements that are not listed like Rw. Explaining notations seems way too unnecessary. I think we should give some examples: F, F2, F', Fw, but imo there's no reason to list all the 18 face moves and all 18 cube rotations.

Just to remember, if the change on regs lead to change on layout, we perhaps need to call for translations, which currently has 23 different languages.

lgarron

[perhaps this isn't the place?] I'm not particularly crazy about how we allow movements that are not listed like Rw. Explaining notations seems way too unnecessary. I think we should give some examples: F, F2, F', Fw, but imo there's no reason to list all the 18 face moves and all 18 cube rotations.

I think I agree with you, but I'm not sure what you are saying. Are you asking for anything to change in/based on this PR?

lgarron · 2018-12-20T07:14:39Z

wca-regulations.md

    - E2b) All competitors have a total time limit of 60 minutes to find and write a solution.
        - E2b1) The judge should call "5 MINUTES REMAINING" at 55 minutes, and must call "STOP" at 60 minutes.
-    - E2c) At 60 minutes, each competitor must submit to the judge a single piece of paper with the competitor's written name (optionally accompanied by WCA ID) and solution, using the notation for the 3x3x3 Cube described in [Regulation 12a](regulations:regulation:12a). Penalty: disqualification of the attempt (DNF).
+    - E2c) At 60 minutes, each competitor must submit to the judge a single piece of paper with a written solution and information to identify the attempt.
+        - E2c1) Information to identify the attempt is: the competitor's name or WCA ID (at least one, optionally both), and optionally the competition name, round, and/or attempt number. Penalty for a submitted solution without a name or WCA ID: disqualification of the attempt (DNF).


I think specifying this not particularly useful. A competitor who wants to get a valid result will write a sufficiently clear name, and I don't see this as a useful avenue for cheating. Open to suggestions, though!

kingmathyall

I don't think E2a1 is necessary - that kind of is just what you'd do regardless of this reg in place or not?
E2c1+++ - I think if they are able to find out who did the attempt, it shouldn't be DNFed so I'm not for this change
E3c4+ I would like to see this added somewhere on an FMC sheet if possible - letting everyone know what moves aren't allowed - this would take up a significant amount of space so I understand this might not be the best idea :/

wca-guidelines.md

kingmathyall · 2018-12-22T00:44:42Z

wca-guidelines.md

+- E2c+) [CLARIFICATION] Although the judge may provide a standard sheet for competitors to submit solutions, a competitor may submit a solution on a different piece of paper. (Note that the piece of paper must come from the judge, according to [Regulation E3a](regulations:regulation:E3a).)
+- E2c1+) [ADDITION] If the competitor forgot to write information to identify the attempt on their intended solution paper before the time limit, they are permitted to add it in front of a judge. In this case, the competitor must ask the judge while submitting their solution and then immediately write information to identify the attempt (and make no other changes) under direct supervision of the judge. Once a competitor has finished submitting their solution (e.g. placing it in the judge's hands and allowing the judge to move on to the next competitor, placing it on the judge's table and walking away), they are not permitted to add any information. If the competitor writes anything after the time limit but before asking the judge, the attempt remains disqualified (DNF).
+- E2c1++) [EXPLANATION] The competitor is not required to submit a paper with the competition name, round, and/or attempt number, but may wish to do so in order to help the organization team keep track of submitted solutions.
+- E2c1+++) [ADDITION] If a judge finds a submitted solution without information to identify the attempt (e.g. while grading the attempt), they should find out the competitor who wrote the solution in order to assign them a DNF (rather than DNS). Note that the competitor must not be allowed to write information to identify the attempt at this point, so they must receive a DNF result.


E2c1+++ - I think if they are able to find out who did the attempt, it shouldn't be DNFed so I'm not for this change

I think we need to be explicit about what is allowed to avoid inconsistent rulings from Delegates. The incidents from this year suggest that not every Delegate is on the same page about this right now.

@AlbertoPdRF, would you be in favor of allowing the result to count at the discretion of the Delegate?

If you can find out who did the attempt, you know who did the attempt, you have their attempt - it shouldn't be a DNF. That's just being way too strict and I think it's unnecessary to be that strict in FMC

Hmm, I just double-check and we had a unanimous WRC consensus for "Can be added in front of judge while submitting" (as opposed to the explicit alternative "Can be added until the end of the competition"): #655 (comment)

Would you be alright sticking with that, or is it possible some of us didn't take into account this case while voting?

I'd want it clarified that if the delegate can determine whose attempt it was to put the DNF in, why not put in the time? I guess when voting I completely overlooked that option. It just doesn't make any sense to me that if fit can be determined who did the attempt, that it gets entered as a DNF. If someone leaves and they can't confirm with the competitor that it is indeed their attempt, then sure, DNF the attempt, but if you can confirm it was there, I think it should be added.

Allowing this at the discretion of the WCA Delagate shouldn't be an option in my opinion, as we would still have the same inconsistent rulings.

lgarron · 2018-12-22T00:46:32Z

3. E3c4+ I would like to see this added somewhere on an FMC sheet if possible - letting everyone know what moves aren't allowed - this would take up a significant amount of space so I understand this might not be the best idea :/

My goal after the draft Regs are out are to work on guides, one of which would be a page with FMC grading instructions. I don't think we can fit it on the FMC sheet, but my hope is that competitors can be aware of the grading sheet and look at it if they want to be careful.

Laura-O · 2018-12-22T01:25:39Z

@Laura-O, could you review again? :-D

Sorry, completely missed that this is still open.

lgarron · 2018-12-22T02:24:01Z

@Laura-O, could you review again? :-D

Sorry, completely missed that this is still open.

Thanks!

lgarron · 2019-01-10T06:42:45Z

This has been dangling for a while, and there are at least 3 additional changes I want to consider. In order to avoid complicating this, I'm going to dismiss @kingmathyall's review on this PR and make separate PRs for easier review for those parts.

Will make separate PRs.

jamesquinn1 · 2019-01-19T14:17:50Z

Could clarification be given on if people are allowed to write insertion stickers ahead of time? It gives a potential way to cheat by writing out algorithms or (in the worst case scenario) someone could have gotten the scramble ahead of time and written the solution out on stickers. I could see a solution to this problem being delegates have to check beforehand, but in a large scale competition that doesn't seem viable.

lgarron · 2019-01-20T07:19:16Z

Could clarification be given on if people are allowed to write insertion stickers ahead of time?

#584 covers this. Unless we want to enforce draconian measures around the world, we need to trust competitors quite a bit for FMC. If you have any suggestions for how to restrict this, feel free to comment there.

lgarron requested a review from a team as a code owner December 18, 2018 21:49

lgarron force-pushed the revise-fmc branch 2 times, most recently from 844110d to c85462a Compare December 18, 2018 21:50

Specify that information to identify the attempt is optional.

dbe8845

lgarron force-pushed the revise-fmc branch from c85462a to dbe8845 Compare December 18, 2018 21:55

Fix Guideline ordering.

15e967b

lgarron force-pushed the revise-fmc branch from cb82a1b to 15e967b Compare December 18, 2018 21:57

Tweak and simplify black out/scribble out spec.

90ebd48

This was referenced Dec 18, 2018

Accidental pop assistance #677

Merged

Notation: move rotations under 12a and attempt to describe valid FMC solutions as clearly as possible. #575

Closed

lgarron added 2 commits December 18, 2018 14:25

Attempt to allow a narrow scope of reinterpretation for brackets/pare…

8704a67

…ns in rotation moves.

Fix some labels.

e0ad5d4

lgarron commented Dec 19, 2018

View reviewed changes

wca-guidelines.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

Update E2c++: fix typo and add [r u] as an example.

03f4e93

AlbertoPdRF approved these changes Dec 19, 2018

View reviewed changes

Laura-O suggested changes Dec 19, 2018

View reviewed changes

lgarron added 2 commits December 19, 2018 07:36

arrows -> long arrows

fb70448

little experience -> due to inexperience

d9cbba7

Use "information to identify the attempt" in E2a1+ for consistency.

f793c98

SAuroux reviewed Dec 19, 2018

View reviewed changes

wca-guidelines.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

lgarron and others added 4 commits December 19, 2018 11:57

Plural moves blackened + replaced

676316c

Shorten E2c1+++.

fbe34db

Fix another typo found by Laurids A. Holm.

f47b3f3

Fix extra indentation from using the GitHub suggestion UI.

29130ec

lgarron changed the title ~~Overhaul FMC Regulations~~ Overhaul Fewest Moves Regulations Dec 19, 2018

lgarron changed the title ~~Overhaul Fewest Moves Regulations~~ Overhaul Fewest Moves Dec 19, 2018

SAuroux reviewed Dec 19, 2018

View reviewed changes

Restore E2c1+.

d5e3b95

lgarron force-pushed the revise-fmc branch from 9e1be27 to d5e3b95 Compare December 20, 2018 00:40

lgarron commented Dec 20, 2018

View reviewed changes

lgarron mentioned this pull request Dec 21, 2018

Summary of changes for the 2019 Regulations #681

Closed

kingmathyall reviewed Dec 22, 2018

View reviewed changes

kingmathyall previously requested changes Dec 22, 2018

View reviewed changes

Laura-O approved these changes Dec 22, 2018

View reviewed changes

campos20 mentioned this pull request Dec 26, 2018

Remove competition name from FMC filling sheet fix #352 thewca/tnoodle#377

Merged

lgarron merged commit 1a8911e into draft Jan 10, 2019

lgarron deleted the revise-fmc branch January 10, 2019 06:44

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Overhaul Fewest Moves #678

Overhaul Fewest Moves #678

lgarron commented Dec 18, 2018 •

edited

Loading

lgarron commented Dec 18, 2018

AlbertoPdRF left a comment

AlbertoPdRF Dec 19, 2018 •

edited

Loading

Laura-O Dec 19, 2018

lgarron Dec 19, 2018

Laura-O Dec 19, 2018

lgarron commented Dec 19, 2018

SAuroux Dec 19, 2018

lgarron Dec 20, 2018

SAuroux commented Dec 19, 2018

lgarron commented Dec 20, 2018

campos20 commented Dec 20, 2018

lgarron left a comment

lgarron Dec 20, 2018

kingmathyall left a comment

kingmathyall Dec 22, 2018

lgarron Dec 22, 2018

kingmathyall Dec 22, 2018

lgarron Dec 22, 2018

kingmathyall Dec 22, 2018

AlbertoPdRF Dec 22, 2018

lgarron commented Dec 22, 2018

Laura-O commented Dec 22, 2018

lgarron commented Dec 22, 2018

lgarron commented Jan 10, 2019

jamesquinn1 commented Jan 19, 2019

lgarron commented Jan 20, 2019

Overhaul Fewest Moves #678

Overhaul Fewest Moves #678

Conversation

lgarron commented Dec 18, 2018 • edited Loading

lgarron commented Dec 18, 2018

AlbertoPdRF left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

AlbertoPdRF Dec 19, 2018 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

lgarron commented Dec 19, 2018

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

SAuroux commented Dec 19, 2018

lgarron commented Dec 20, 2018

campos20 commented Dec 20, 2018

lgarron left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

kingmathyall left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

lgarron commented Dec 22, 2018

Laura-O commented Dec 22, 2018

lgarron commented Dec 22, 2018

lgarron commented Jan 10, 2019

jamesquinn1 commented Jan 19, 2019

lgarron commented Jan 20, 2019

lgarron commented Dec 18, 2018 •

edited

Loading

AlbertoPdRF Dec 19, 2018 •

edited

Loading