--- In quizbowl_at_yahoogroups.com, jp_lien <no_reply_at_y...> wrote: > I'm not sure if the more > common (if grammatically hideous) 'onto' was acceptable, although > based on the stare I got from the moderator, I'm going to assume that > it wasn't. no, it was. on the bounceback my teammate said "onto" and it was accepted. (i was also planning to go in with "onto" had he not buzzed first, and then say "surjective" only if prompted.) also, for the tossup whose answer (i gather) was compact, i buzzed early and said closed, and it was right--i didn't know until now that it was in fact about compactness. i don't remember exactly how that one started, but i could've sworn i heard something unbounded--like maybe "the whole real line"--as one of the examples, which would rule out compact, and that's exactly why i had enough confidence to go in with closed. perhaps i misheard, though, since it would seem that if the "true" answer was compact, then they wouldn't have included an unbounded set as an example. > I do have to agree, though, that the unfortunate choice of > examples could easily lead knowledgeable people astray. Of course, > given the set of askable functional properties, it isn't easy to > narrow the set with just two examples, or to anticipate ways in which > people might misinterpret your intentions. Frankly, I was helped by > my inability to picture the functions as quickly as they were read, > which forced me to wait for the clues which I found useful. i agree that it isn't easy to anticipate what people might neg with. but if you do anticipate something like that, it's not all that hard to narrow the set with two examples. like i said earlier, using "any cubic polynomial" (or linear, or quintic, or odd-degree in general) instead of the very-specific-and-emphatically-odd "x^3-x" would have pretty much done it. tastiest tossup imho: heimdall. joon
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0: Sat 12 Feb 2022 12:30:46 AM EST EST