Difference between revisions of "AoPS Wiki talk:Contest Problems Standards"
(Categories) |
m (Talk:Contest Problems Standards moved to AoPSWiki talk:Contest Problems Standards: fix namespace) |
||
| (One intermediate revision by one other user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
In my opinion, the Olympiad Complex Numbers Problems and Olympiad Trigonometry Problems categories are not useful. First of all, problems involving strictly complex numbers or strictly trigonometry are very uncommon in olympiad problems. Second, they are practically the same. Third, most problems which focus on trigonometry and complex numbers can be classified as either geometry or algebra (or maybe occasionally number theory). And finally, I think it wise to adopt the system of IMO problem categorization, which consists only of categories for algebra, combinatorics, geometry, and number theory problems. Does anybody else have an opinion on the subject? —[[User:Boy Soprano II|Boy Soprano II]] 17:11, 25 August 2006 (EDT) | In my opinion, the Olympiad Complex Numbers Problems and Olympiad Trigonometry Problems categories are not useful. First of all, problems involving strictly complex numbers or strictly trigonometry are very uncommon in olympiad problems. Second, they are practically the same. Third, most problems which focus on trigonometry and complex numbers can be classified as either geometry or algebra (or maybe occasionally number theory). And finally, I think it wise to adopt the system of IMO problem categorization, which consists only of categories for algebra, combinatorics, geometry, and number theory problems. Does anybody else have an opinion on the subject? —[[User:Boy Soprano II|Boy Soprano II]] 17:11, 25 August 2006 (EDT) | ||
| + | |||
| + | Basically any classification scheme you can come up with for math problems is going to be flawed in some way or another. For example, there are plenty of problems that look like geometry problems that don't really have much to do with geometry at all but are in fact algebra problems. (USAMO 2002/2 springs to mind immediately.) --[[User:ComplexZeta|ComplexZeta]] 02:06, 26 August 2006 (EDT) | ||
Latest revision as of 15:38, 4 March 2007
In my opinion, the Olympiad Complex Numbers Problems and Olympiad Trigonometry Problems categories are not useful. First of all, problems involving strictly complex numbers or strictly trigonometry are very uncommon in olympiad problems. Second, they are practically the same. Third, most problems which focus on trigonometry and complex numbers can be classified as either geometry or algebra (or maybe occasionally number theory). And finally, I think it wise to adopt the system of IMO problem categorization, which consists only of categories for algebra, combinatorics, geometry, and number theory problems. Does anybody else have an opinion on the subject? —Boy Soprano II 17:11, 25 August 2006 (EDT)
Basically any classification scheme you can come up with for math problems is going to be flawed in some way or another. For example, there are plenty of problems that look like geometry problems that don't really have much to do with geometry at all but are in fact algebra problems. (USAMO 2002/2 springs to mind immediately.) --ComplexZeta 02:06, 26 August 2006 (EDT)
