While scrolling down through the leader board of CodeAgon 2017, I found these top 10 performers to be extraordinary.
Submission time of 4th and 6th problem
Submission time of 5th and 6th problem
Submission time of 4th and 5th problem
There is a possibility that they might have written the code but couldn't submit because of poor internet connection and later submitted both codes together or they had solved the exact same problem before and had prewritten code.
The first scenario is very rare and 3 performers from top 10 on the leaderboard will suffer the same in the same contest is just indigestible and even if someone had solved the exact same problem before, it would take some time to read and recognise that they have solved it already and it will take few more seconds to search their old codes. But I think codeAgon problems were unique, or even if it wasn't then the author will make at least the problem statement or input-output formats different which makes it difficult to solve within few seconds.
But still, I can't say that they solved it in groups and are cheaters because there might be some other possibilities which I am not able to think.So I request them (I guess you have recognised yourself) to please explain how they did it. :)
Well atleast 2 are certain cheaters -
1. shivasoni — as i posted in comment of simple recurrence — 3-4 people trying from different accounts(deadend, saharsh etc..) and submitting from one.
2. gohan95 — gohan being a fan of REP(for loop alternative) variable does one question, then his alter ego(read his friend) changes his complete coding style, changes template, forgets to add his classic done by line and uses only for loop instead of REP solves that tough DP optimization question in 6 minutes.
From the rankings — it is obvious that the leaderboard shows multiple people groups' competing as individuals. Whenever there is a prize money contest just online, this happens. I solved 3rd tough combinatorics/DP question at 68th rank(question-wise rank), and was only curious if the question was so simple(but the answer is the above I guess).
would they be diqualified ?
Well, they should be. I messaged an admin online and he said yes for code copiers. Also, some cheaters will remain unscathed — there are >50% suspicious accounts in top-20, but not all are as obvious as above 2 cited. Group cheaters(multiple people doing different questions) can always make lame excuses.
i never get the concept of cheating ,u are cheating just to get a job offer or an internship in the company which u actually don't deserve ,what if same kinds of problems u face while developing a software in company ,then what will u do ? who will u ask ? u can't cheat now!
If this is so , then i have also found people in the top rankers change their input styles, like using cin in one question and using predefined templates in another. This should not be a criteria for standard questions which employs using standard algorithms and tweaking it to suit one's needs but can be a role player in dp questions in which everything is designed from scratch like , i had flows algo implemented by my teammate during ICPC preparation , he uses templates while i don't when i found that the fifth is a flows question and i am having less time , so naturally i would take his flows implementation , where possible i would not be using his FOR templates because i am more suited using traditional for loop , this should not dsqualify me as i didn't cheat . So deciding should be done on the basis with which the question should be designed not on basis of whether it using templates in one and normal syntax in another.
I knew someone could come up with a lame excuse — anyways here is my reply based on facts to your rather long oblivious comment. I am assuming you are from gohan95 team — anyways it does not matter.
Codes — 1. http://ideone.com/a27YPl 2. http://ideone.com/uuvjkN
First I would like all to go through this similar cheating incident in which CF high rated guys(grandmasters) make similar argument http://codeforces.com/blog/entry/47901?#comment-322312 regarding cheating incident on Atcoder.
So, gohan95 solves one question(3rd one) — see the code inside main function, he uses only REP and TR(nothing else — 10 instances). 6 minutes later he solves the second question — this time also only main function exists(he completely forgets the REP and TR's). He forgets his pun line //done by XXX. He re-orders scanf/printf defines on top — do you reorder your defines in 6 minutes between 2 submissions(that too on both hard questions).
Both codes has only main functions and no templates.
I don't need to prove it to you whether you cheated or not. Its fairly trivial observation from gohan95's codes.
UPD1: Here are your other codes — http://ideone.com/zaW0js http://ideone.com/wfCcEY http://ideone.com/s7UHPd .There are clearly 2 sets of codes(2 codes match to person A and 3 to person B) in all 5 — Come on, if you took part as 2 people you dont need to lie and prove yourself right in front of CF community. We all know how cheaters behave after getting caught. I can post other links too but I think I have made myself pretty clear.
I think you misunderstood me. I am not from gohan95 team. What i want to say is that cheting like this could me mainly committed in the third and fourth question, these were were so made that they should be coded from ground up , so replacing cin by standard template in one and not using in other can be due to cheating. What i was saying was about the fifth matching/flow question , anyone could get standard implementation from the interned and change it suit one's needs , this doesn't mean he cheted , he just saved time , like he might not be getting his implementation.This should be valid for just the fifth question which involved less coding and more thinking. For the other questions , i support you.
Thanks. From the above links, you can re-verify my points even if you belong to that 'team' or not(the links pertain to all questions not just 5th question — in fact i have taken the example of 3rd and 4th question only). A general rule can't be specified ofcourse(templates vs simple), and it's on a case to case basis — but in this case it is quite clear(from the codes submitted) that there are atleast 2 people in that team.
I totally support you , Indians have very bad reputation in this regard , I myself had witnessed cheating in several online contests and am particularly shocked to see this . You either in order to make contest fair , run into an environment where exiting full screen mode might disqualify you but this might have its own side issues. I request you to request whichever person you contact to pay details to the third and fourth question because they were the questions which involved several cheating. Changing templates in these questions surely suggest cheating and these people should be called to clarify on this.
A general rule can't be specified ofcourse(templates vs simple), and it's on a case to case basis — but in this case it is quite clear(from the codes submitted) that there are atleast 2 people in that team
This case to case basis according to me would be just the fifth question , other questions involved to think and code, there was nothing like using standard algorithms to solve it.
Relax, you don't need to fear anything if you did nothing wrong. I am afraid even the obvious cheaters like this one will go scot-free. It's Hackerrank anyways not Atcoder/CodeChef which are more particular about cheaters — don't u see what happens in their regular week of codes. I received a reply from a contest admin making a mockery of my above claims that I posted with proofs :P.
http://www.spoj.com/problems/PFDEP/
This problem on spoj is quiet similar to 4th problem dependency hell, if anyone had solved this problem in the past, it wont take him much time to solve this here :P
abe mkl tumhare baap ka kya jaa rha hai BC !!!!!
^ WTF
You belong to shivasoni team or gohan95 team or some other cheater team?
aaj to dangal hoga BC ... kisi ki team se bhi hun ... tere baap ka kya jaa rha hai :D :D
Tera baap mai hi hu. Beta cheating karta hai toh acha nahi lagta.
ab tu kon hai bc .... naye naye character aa rhe hein kahani mein ...
Ye toh khel gya... Keeping the funny part aside... This was a serious act... Violating the code of conduct of the contest is not sustainable...
-^-
It's so pathetic that such cases are quite common from a country which is sending 8 teams to ICPC WF.
You all need to grow up and keep up the spirit.
How do u think is sending 8 teams related to such events. I agree that these guys need to grow up and keep up the spirit but that is no way related to sending 8 teams.
Dont say rubbish for the sake of just saying
"sending 8 teams to WF" means that the country is capable of producing world class programmers and there are a lot cheating cases from the top 20.
it's definitely not a good example for anyone.
You know what's even more pathetic? When you see the selection process of WF that took place in India this year.
saharshluthra I saw that. multisite regional sending a team from each of its sub-site is by no means fair since teams were allocated these sites on the basis of their rankings in online round
This way many deserving teams were denied the chance of WF, and the sad part is there never is a transparent selection process.
Sad part is, even though everyone agrees with this, nothing can be done because it seems to be an autocracy of Asia director and Associate Director. This has been a characteristic of Asia ICPC in many years, absence of clear complete rules, and outrageous decisions after the contest :(
Nice observation @zorro_