| A) Admirable solution, nicely
presented.
B) Working backwards is a good problem solving strategy,
but make sure to present solutions arguing forward from known information
and facts.
C) Complete solution, or close enough; fine job.
D) The proof was difficult to decipher because of a
confusing or illegible presentation.
E) The paper did not merit any points, but the response
was quite enjoyable to read!
F) Good idea, but observe that if a segment crosses
PA it doesn't necessarily cross PB. (But it will cross
QA.)
H) Half the question was answered correctly; the other
half was omitted or no headway was made.
J) Be careful to correctly compensate for overcounting
configurations; you'll need to divide by either 4 or 24, depending on
your approach.
K) Your formula was correct, just supply an explanation
or some algebraic arguments to justify your answer.
L) Fine answer, but more work than necessary; it is
OK to be more concise or cite previous results.
M) Mostly there; main ideas are correct but points
deducted for missing details or too brief a proof.
|
N) Not bad;
careless mistakes or a false statement tarnish an otherwise correct
solution.
O) Omitted problem or no attempt at a proof.
P) Your conjecture looks good. Now to find an explanation
of why it is true...
Q) Recall that P and Q are adjacent
points on the circle, so none of the other points are located between
them.
R) On the right track or a few of the correct ideas
present, so deserving of some credit.
S) Note that n stands for the number of segments,
while 2n is the number of points around the circle. So n=4
means four segments, not four points. In general, be sure to take into
account the manner in which PA, PB, QA, and
QB intersect the remaining segments in the diagram.
V) The formula stated was not quite correct, but the
accompanying explanation was on the right track nonetheless.
W) On the wrong track or a very difficult approach,
but warranting some credit.
Y) Little or no significant progress towards a solution
(occasionally despite a fair amount of work), or misinterpretion of
the question.
|
