You can find the corresponding deadlines in the BRUTE system.

Item to evaluate | min | max | note |
---|---|---|---|

06_pd | |||

Ability to play the game/tournament. | 2 | 4 | Even the most simple player will be accepted in this part. If the player plays, the student will gain 2 points. That is also a necessary condition for the player to be allowed to take part in the tournament. Another 0-2 points will be awarded manually with regards to the level of the student's code. Readability, clarity of comments, and elaboration will be the subject of evaluation. Note that using the most trivial player won't give us anything really to assess. Every additional idea will be, however, rewarded. |

06_tour | |||

Player with memory. | 0 | 4 | The player can work with a history of past matches and changes its strategy appropriately. The level of the code uploaded for the tournament will be assessed here. For example, it may happen that a very advanced and interesting code will lose against simpler strategies. This part should, therefore, also balance such inequality. 0-2 points for the analysis of history (past matches) and/or for the analysis of the Payoff matrix, 0-2 for the readability and clarity of the code. |

Ranking in the tournament #1 (Payoff matrix known beforehand) | 0.5 | 2 | Ranking will be divided into quarters, 0.5-1-1.5-2, i.e., even the simplest player gets at least 0.5 points. |

Ranking in the tournament #2 (Payoff matrix not known before the tournament) | 0.5 | 2 | The same as above. |

Total: You can gain up to 12 points (but at least 3).

courses/be5b33prg/homework/regular/06_prisoners_dilemma/06e_evaluation.txt · Last modified: 2021/01/04 12:28 by nemymila