Endaris wrote:
Or they use the definition by the difficulty-grouping and think it is 3.5-5.5
I never liked that rounding system to begin with. As an example, can you agree that I have a 7 star fc because of my #1 play because it's 6.8*? I don't.
Endaris wrote:
Or they use the definition by the difficulty-grouping and think it is 3.5-5.5
4*-5* maps -> 4.00 to 4.99You don't exclude last number in stack. Same as you cannot exclude first number from it.
I mistyped there 5.99 as 4.99 then I changed it to 5.00 because you confused me.[Taiga] wrote:
4*-5* maps -> 4.00 to 4.99You don't exclude last number in stack. Same as you cannot exclude first number from it.
[4* - 5* ] = {4.00, 4.01, 4.02, ... , 4.98, 4.99, 5.00}
xdB1rd wrote:
There is a very complicated mathematical and philosophical problem that needs to be solved.
Consider calculating the arithmetic mean of 4 and 5 as the sup and inf of our setArthraxium wrote:
Are we done?
Wow.Arthraxium wrote:
Are we done?
Arthraxium wrote:
I don't multi, so I'm all gud.
Good idea. I will follow your example.Arthraxium wrote:
I don't multi, so I'm all gud.
4-5 typically translates to [4,5] \in \R unless you say "4-5 exclusive" in which case it translates to (4,5). So no, anything >5 would not be included.B1rd wrote:
There is a very complicated mathematical and philosophical problem that needs to be solved.
That is, does 4-5*, as in the context of the title for a multiplayer lobby mean 4.0-5.0*, or 4.0-5.99*, or something else entirely?
This needs to be solved once and for all. Let the debate begin.
If only there was a way to put this equation in the lobby name.Arthraxium wrote:
.
We are most certainly not done. You haven't even defined f(x)! As near as I can tell, you intend for f(x) to be a many-valued function that takes on as values all maps with star ratings equal to the argument. From there, we have to define some sort of ordering on the set of maps in order to make sense of the interval. I guess the obvious choice is to consider all maps of the same star rating to be members of an equivalence class and then using the standard total order on real numbers over the star rating associated with each equivalence class.Arthraxium wrote:
Are we done?
Yes.YayMii wrote:
No, I'm just saying that people should use more decimals.
I think you're misunderstanding the point of significant figures.YayMii wrote:
If we're speaking strictly mathematically, the star ratings are categorized by 1 significant digit, displayed to the hundredths (or 3 sigdigs for the majority of maps), and calculated at a floating point value. If only one digit is given in the lobby title, it should be mathematically safe to assume that anything within the class boundaries would be acceptable (given that this is how the game categorizes them anyways).
That being said, the limits of an actual lobby have absolutely nothing to do with mathematics, simply due to the fact that some people are more lenient than others when it comes to what they are willing to play although a lot people disapprove of my map choices regardless of difficulty lolrip.
No, if we are speaking purely mathematically it means:YayMii wrote:
If we're speaking strictly mathematically.
FFS people, OP didn't ask for a scientist or programmer, they asked for a mathematician. I seriously question everybody's backgrounds here as I doubt any of you actually qualify as a mathematician.chainpullz wrote:
4-5 typically translates to [4,5] \in \R unless you say "4-5 exclusive" in which case it translates to (4,5). So no, anything >5 would not be included.
It is 4.00 to 5.00 type "star>=4 star<=5". But 5.49* is acceptable coz it can be rounded to 5 using standard rules any higher is considered 6 star just consult with lobby first.B1rd wrote:
4.0-5.0*, or 4.0-5.99*, or something else entirely?
At least Cirno can count better than Microsoft, amirite?[Taiga] wrote:
Someone ask https://osu.ppy.sh/u/Cirno - she made perfect math class so will know for sure