Furniture Moving: Contest Evolution

Contents

Submissions over time

It's impressive to look at the sheer volume of entries. This area plot shows how the total number of entries grew as the contest progressed. The green area represents the entries that passed the test suite, and the red area shows those that failed. Overall 1270 of 1834 entries passed the test suite, for a pass rate of 69%. Both the number of entries and the pass rate are down, as compared to recent contests. We suspect this is was due to the increased complexity of the problem.

Activity by hour

The previous area plot shows a lot of "lumpiness". A steepening slope shows an increase in activity. A histogram shows this more directly. Each bar represents an hour's worth of entries.

The contest had three major phases. The first day was in "darkness", where contestants could submit entries but they couldn't see any of the entries or their scores. To win this phase, an entry must be general and robust. The second day was "twilight", where we showed the scores but not yet the code. This allowed contestants to develop their algorithm without anyone else being able to leverage their ideas.

On the histogram, the darkness and twilight phases are the two large blue boxes on the left. The boxes call out two other time periods: the Sunday Push (we offered a prize to the greatest cumulative improvement to the score in 24 hours) and the Tuesday Leap (when we rewarded the largest single improvement). The vertical gray lines show the other deadlines: Daybreak and Final.

Activity by our Winners

Looking at the activity of the contest winners shows their different participation styles. Each winner is listed in order and a red line marks the deadline for the phase he won.

Most active participants

This bar plot shows the number of entries submitted by each author. Of our 94 contestants, these were the most active.

Score

This is the most useful diagram for visualizing the contest. It shows the dramatic improvements that occurred over time. Each passing entry is a dot, with its submission time on the x-axis and it's score on the y-axis. Since a lower score is better, the dots push down further as time goes on. All entries that took the lead are colored red and the red lines marks the best score at any time. The sample entry is the leftmost red dot and the winning entry is the last red dot in the lower right.

Some of the leading entries are circled and labeled with the author's name. They show who was making the biggest improvements in score (represented in this plot as a vertical drop in the red line) at any point in the contest.

The improvement in score happens over a huge dynamic range. Early in the contest, it is easy to make big improvements in the score. As the algorithms get better, improvements become increasingly difficult. To show this, we normalize the scores so the best (smallest) score is 1 and the worst score is some power of 10. Then we plot them on a logarithmic scale. This exaggerates the improvements at the end of the contest. By increasing the number of decades we spread the scores over, we increasingly exaggerate the smaller improvements made at the end of the contest.

Percent improvement

Here is a plot of the percent improvement generated by each new leader relative to the previous leader. This lets us see who is responsible for the biggest changes over the contest. The upper frontier of this plot is a sort of hall of fame, and someone whose name appears there more than once managed to make several significant improvements to the score.

results vs. cpu time

One of the interesting aspects of the contest is that entries needed to minimize two things at once. Getting the best possible answer must be weighed against the time an entry takes to run. As discussed above, the entry's score is a combination of these two factors. Plotting these two against each other yields a very different picture of the contest.

The leader line is shown in red again in this picture. The gray contours show lines of constant score. In general, the best score is somewhere along the lower-left frontier of shortest time and lowest results. Big improvements tend to move down and to the right, and they are followed by tweaking battles in which the new algorithm claws its way back down the time axis.

Improvements by day

In order to get a feel for the trends in the contest, let's show a day-by-day version of the result vs. CPU time plot. Here we are looking at each of the seven days of the contest. All entries for all days are shown in light blue for context, while the entries for the day in question appear as red dots.

Entry length

Here we are looking at a plot over time that shows how many characters of code are in each of the leading entries. In regions where you see entries of more or less the same length there are very few differences from one entry to the next. In other places you can see the code getting shorter or longer. The density of the lines also shows how often the lead is changing. It's impressive to see that several times during the contest shorter code ousted longer code from the top spot, either by pruning unneeded computation or by introducing new algorithms.

There has been a lot of discussion in recent contests about how long the leading entries become. To discourage this, we've considered penalizing entry length as part of the score. Since trimming out unnecessary code makes the entry run faster, we haven't yet decided this was necessary. This contest, however, ran into an unintended limit on code length. The column in our MySQL database that stores the M-code is of type text, which is can only contain up to 65535 characters (shown in the red line below). This was the first contest we'd hit this barrier. Unfortunately, the result was pressure to remove comments and make the code less legible in other ways.

Contributions per day

These plots and statistics show the total contribution of each contestant to each day's improvement in score. They show which contestants did the heavy lifting for each day.

 Wed, 03-Nov-2004
 
 45.59%  1 Michael Kleder
 34.55%  4 Stijn Helsen
 10.77%  1 Paolo
  9.09%  1 E. Brian Welch
 
 
 Thu, 04-Nov-2004
 
 100.00%  2 Stijn Helsen
 
 
 Fri, 05-Nov-2004
 
 55.75%  3 Mike Bindschadler
 26.26%  1 Arnaud Delorme
  6.97%  4 the cyclist
  5.60%  7 Stijn Helsen
  5.16%  2 Timothy Alderson
  0.16%  1 Jeeter
  0.11%  5 Other
 
 
 Sat, 06-Nov-2004
 
 27.89%  1 Roman Akulov
 22.24%  3 Tom Lemke
 20.86% 12 Stijn Helsen
  9.13%  1 Barking Weasel
  8.33% 11 Timothy Alderson
  6.32%  5 wu zhili
  5.22%  5 Other
 
 
 Sun, 07-Nov-2004
 
 45.60%  5 Niilo Sirola
 28.74% 20 Jan Langer
 10.58%  5 christian ylamaki
  5.97%  7 Timothy Alderson
  3.12%  3 Claus Still
  3.00%  2 Tom Lemke
  2.99%  4 Other
 
 
 Mon, 08-Nov-2004
 
 82.40%  2 Tom Lemke
 10.24%  5 Timothy Alderson
  3.86%  4 the cyclist
  1.82%  1 APhys
  1.66%  1 khh
  0.02%  1 Khh
 
 
 Tue, 09-Nov-2004
 
 40.49% 11 Timothy Alderson
 28.92%  4 the cyclist
 16.68%  1 wu zhili
 10.04%  1 christian ylamaki
  1.58%  1 Brian Jones
  1.34%  6 Stijn Helsen
  0.95%  3 Other
 
 
 Wed, 10-Nov-2004
 
 45.41%  9 Timothy Alderson
 25.76%  1 the cyclist
 14.50%  2 wu zhili
  9.85%  1 pedrillo
  2.06%  2 plindis
  1.51%  1 Niilo Sirola
  0.92%  1 GUO
 
 

Clans

Submitting an entry by using the "edit" button on an existing entry marks the new entry as a child of the first. Tracing each entry back from parent to parent identifies its oldest ancestor. All the entries that have the same oldest ancestor are in the same "clan". This plot draws lines between each child and its parent and colors the six largest clans. Entries in the same clan that don't have a line between them are connected by an entry that didn't pass (so it doesn't have a score to plot).

Differences from winner

One difficulty of the clan plot is that it relies on authors to properly credit their submission. A break between clans may be spurious. Also, some entries may be based on more than one parent. Another way to see groups of entries is to look at the percent-difference between each entry and the contest winner. In this scatter plot, the color of the dot represents the percentage of code that is different from the winning entry and the size of the dot is proportional to the number of lines of code it contains.

Conclusion

Thanks for participating, whether by entering the contest many times, once, or merely checking out the site every now and again. Be sure to sign up on our notify list so you'll be ready to play the next contest: Send an e-mail to lists@mathworks.com with "subscribe contest-announce" in the body.

Appendix: All the leaders

Here, for the record, is a chronological list of the contestants who held the number one spot and the amount of time they were in the lead. The lead changed 174 times. The last entry on this list is the winning entry.

   1. MATLAB Contest Team, "Sample Entry"
      Wed 09:07, Inf% imp, 1.20 hrs
   2. Paolo, "SparseTest001"
      Wed 10:19, 10.66% imp, 1.34 hrs
   3. Michael Kleder, "better luck 6"
      Wed 11:40, 50.48% imp, 4.02 hrs
   4. Stijn Helsen, "Linear space6"
      Wed 15:41, 25.19% imp, 1.00 hrs
   5. E. Brian Welch, "Let 'Em Be 2"
      Wed 16:40, 27.17% imp, 0.12 hrs
   6. Stijn Helsen, "Linear space_optim1"
      Wed 16:48, 90.85% imp, 0.25 hrs
   7. Stijn Helsen, "Linear space_optim2"
      Wed 17:03, 51.10% imp, 4.00 hrs
   8. Stijn Helsen, "Linear space_optim2_5"
      Wed 21:03, 0.32% imp, 6.02 hrs
   9. Stijn Helsen, "Linear space_optim4_1"
      Thu 03:04, 2.12% imp, 9.55 hrs
  10. Stijn Helsen, "test2"
      Thu 12:37, 0.00% imp, 12.94 hrs
  11. Mike Bindschadler, "10InternalRepeats"
      Fri 01:34, 16.21% imp, 10.13 hrs
  12. Mike Bindschadler, "10InternalRepeats 2"
      Fri 11:42, 0.19% imp, 0.17 hrs
  13. Mike Bindschadler, "Faster10IntReps 2"
      Fri 11:52, 0.24% imp, 0.45 hrs
  14. the cyclist, "I'm not Ed Koch"
      Fri 12:19, 0.01% imp, 0.96 hrs
  15. the cyclist, "Ed Koch 11"
      Fri 13:17, 2.46% imp, 0.55 hrs
  16. Stijn Helsen, "MoreFullLines7_1"
      Fri 13:50, 1.44% imp, 0.84 hrs
  17. wu zhili, "test mike&sti's great work"
      Fri 14:40, 0.03% imp, 0.51 hrs
  18. Stijn Helsen, "test mike&sti's great work__"
      Fri 15:11, 0.00% imp, 0.46 hrs
  19. Stijn Helsen, "MoreFullLines8"
      Fri 15:38, 0.59% imp, 0.30 hrs
  20. the cyclist, "Poseidon 25"
      Fri 15:57, 0.01% imp, 0.07 hrs
  21. the cyclist, "Poseidon 12"
      Fri 16:01, 0.00% imp, 0.12 hrs
  22. Andy Mack, "faster"
      Fri 16:08, 0.00% imp, 0.21 hrs
  23. Stijn Helsen, "faster__"
      Fri 16:21, 0.00% imp, 0.54 hrs
  24. Jeeter, "faster__blah4"
      Fri 16:54, 0.06% imp, 0.08 hrs
  25. Tom Lemke, "faster__blah4 0001"
      Fri 16:59, 0.00% imp, 0.09 hrs
  26. Stijn Helsen, "faster_blah4__"
      Fri 17:04, 0.01% imp, 0.31 hrs
  27. Stijn Helsen, "faster_blah4___"
      Fri 17:23, 0.02% imp, 0.06 hrs
  28. Stijn Helsen, "faster_blah4_____"
      Fri 17:26, 0.00% imp, 0.63 hrs
  29. Yi Cao, "slower_blah4"
      Fri 18:04, 0.00% imp, 0.32 hrs
  30. Timothy Alderson, "TLL27"
      Fri 18:24, 1.85% imp, 0.43 hrs
  31. Timothy Alderson, "TLL29"
      Fri 18:49, 0.08% imp, 0.77 hrs
  32. christian ylamaki, "TLL29_cy1"
      Fri 19:36, 0.00% imp, 1.68 hrs
  33. Arnaud Delorme, "Super recur weight2 + best"
      Fri 21:17, 9.99% imp, 3.39 hrs
  34. christian ylamaki, "Super recur weight2 + Sleepwalker 8"
      Sat 00:40, 0.61% imp, 1.86 hrs
  35. wu zhili, "back"
      Sat 02:32, 0.07% imp, 1.20 hrs
  36. wu zhili, "avoidUnneccesaryCall"
      Sat 03:44, 0.04% imp, 0.14 hrs
  37. wu zhili, "avoidUnneccesaryCall_"
      Sat 03:53, 0.01% imp, 0.70 hrs
  38. Yi Cao, "avoidU"
      Sat 04:34, 0.02% imp, 0.97 hrs
  39. wu zhili, "notSureHowSlowItWillBe_2"
      Sat 05:33, 0.18% imp, 2.17 hrs
  40. Tom Lemke, "in throught the out door 001"
      Sat 07:43, 3.00% imp, 0.30 hrs
  41. Tom Lemke, "in throught the out door 003"
      Sat 08:01, 0.56% imp, 0.08 hrs
  42. wu zhili, "itShouldBeFaster"
      Sat 08:05, 0.74% imp, 0.13 hrs
  43. Tom Lemke, "itShouldBeFaster 001"
      Sat 08:13, 0.03% imp, 0.29 hrs
  44. Stijn Helsen, "itShouldBeFaster_01cor"
      Sat 08:30, 0.59% imp, 1.10 hrs
  45. Barking Weasel, "itShouldBeFaster_01cor_wth"
      Sat 09:36, 1.54% imp, 0.24 hrs
  46. Stijn Helsen, "itShouldBeFaster_07"
      Sat 09:51, 0.07% imp, 0.13 hrs
  47. Stijn Helsen, "itShouldBeFaster_08"
      Sat 09:58, 0.99% imp, 1.37 hrs
  48. Stijn Helsen, "itShouldBeFaster_1"
      Sat 11:20, 0.02% imp, 0.00 hrs
  49. Stijn Helsen, "itShouldBeFaster_10"
      Sat 11:21, 0.09% imp, 1.54 hrs
  50. Timothy Alderson, "TLL45"
      Sat 12:53, 0.81% imp, 0.68 hrs
  51. Stijn Helsen, "itShouldBeFaster_11"
      Sat 13:34, 1.46% imp, 0.22 hrs
  52. Stijn Helsen, "itShouldBeFaster_11_"
      Sat 13:48, 0.04% imp, 0.01 hrs
  53. Brian Jones, "ithinkican"
      Sat 13:48, 0.06% imp, 0.75 hrs
  54. Roman Akulov, "wannabe1stplace-4"
      Sat 14:34, 4.95% imp, 0.36 hrs
  55. Brian Jones, "holidaysinthesun"
      Sat 14:55, 0.12% imp, 0.00 hrs
  56. Timothy Alderson, "TLL56"
      Sat 14:55, 0.10% imp, 0.32 hrs
  57. Stijn Helsen, "itShouldBeFaster_11___"
      Sat 15:14, 0.03% imp, 0.02 hrs
  58. Brian Jones, "bodies"
      Sat 15:15, 0.05% imp, 0.14 hrs
  59. Stijn Helsen, "itShouldBeFaster_11_1"
      Sat 15:23, 0.28% imp, 0.16 hrs
  60. Stijn Helsen, "itShouldBeFaster_11_3"
      Sat 15:33, 0.03% imp, 0.88 hrs
  61. Timothy Alderson, "TLL61"
      Sat 16:26, 0.16% imp, 0.22 hrs
  62. Timothy Alderson, "TLL64"
      Sat 16:39, 0.17% imp, 0.29 hrs
  63. Stijn Helsen, "itShouldBeFaster_11_12"
      Sat 16:56, 0.00% imp, 0.11 hrs
  64. Stijn Helsen, "itShouldBeFaster_11_13"
      Sat 17:02, 0.01% imp, 0.23 hrs
  65. Timothy Alderson, "TLL66"
      Sat 17:17, 0.08% imp, 0.15 hrs
  66. Timothy Alderson, "TLL68"
      Sat 17:26, 0.06% imp, 0.34 hrs
  67. Timothy Alderson, "TLL72"
      Sat 17:46, 0.01% imp, 0.75 hrs
  68. Timothy Alderson, "TLL73"
      Sat 18:31, 0.05% imp, 1.07 hrs
  69. Timothy Alderson, "TLL76"
      Sat 19:36, 0.04% imp, 0.59 hrs
  70. Timothy Alderson, "TLL78"
      Sat 20:11, 0.01% imp, 0.13 hrs
  71. Timothy Alderson, "TLL79"
      Sat 20:19, 0.02% imp, 11.12 hrs
  72. Niilo Sirola, "SFAD / TTL79"
      Sun 07:26, 0.50% imp, 0.70 hrs
  73. Niilo Sirola, "SFAD / TTL79 tweak11"
      Sun 08:08, 1.74% imp, 0.34 hrs
  74. the cyclist, "Two can tweak SFAD"
      Sun 08:29, 0.06% imp, 0.01 hrs
  75. Jan Langer, "abcdefg"
      Sun 08:29, 0.05% imp, 0.32 hrs
  76. christian ylamaki, "qwerty"
      Sun 08:49, 0.21% imp, 0.37 hrs
  77. Jan Langer, "was solls"
      Sun 09:11, 0.67% imp, 0.14 hrs
  78. christian ylamaki, "was solls_cy1"
      Sun 09:19, 0.20% imp, 0.27 hrs
  79. the cyclist, "relax"
      Sun 09:35, 0.01% imp, 0.01 hrs
  80. christian ylamaki, "was solls_cy2"
      Sun 09:36, 0.09% imp, 0.23 hrs
  81. christian ylamaki, "Back to the Future"
      Sun 09:49, 0.03% imp, 0.04 hrs
  82. christian ylamaki, "Back to the Future 2"
      Sun 09:51, 0.11% imp, 2.14 hrs
  83. Roman Akulov, "wannabe1stplace-21"
      Sun 12:00, 0.10% imp, 0.49 hrs
  84. Timothy Alderson, "TLL91"
      Sun 12:29, 0.00% imp, 0.26 hrs
  85. Timothy Alderson, "TLL92"
      Sun 12:45, 0.22% imp, 0.21 hrs
  86. Timothy Alderson, "TLL94"
      Sun 12:58, 0.03% imp, 0.01 hrs
  87. Jan Langer, "TLL92 try1.5"
      Sun 12:58, 0.00% imp, 0.28 hrs
  88. Jan Langer, "TLL92 try1.554"
      Sun 13:15, 0.03% imp, 0.12 hrs
  89. Jan Langer, "TLL94 try554"
      Sun 13:23, 0.10% imp, 0.74 hrs
  90. Timothy Alderson, "TLL102"
      Sun 14:08, 0.04% imp, 0.36 hrs
  91. Timothy Alderson, "TLL104"
      Sun 14:29, 0.02% imp, 0.83 hrs
  92. Claus Still, "TLL94_cs9"
      Sun 15:19, 0.10% imp, 0.13 hrs
  93. Claus Still, "TLL94_cs10"
      Sun 15:26, 0.07% imp, 0.14 hrs
  94. Timothy Alderson, "TLL108"
      Sun 15:34, 0.01% imp, 0.61 hrs
  95. Niilo Sirola, "another thought"
      Sun 16:11, 0.10% imp, 0.11 hrs
  96. Claus Still, "TLL94_cs15"
      Sun 16:17, 0.03% imp, 0.32 hrs
  97. Niilo Sirola, "another thought 3"
      Sun 16:37, 0.04% imp, 0.13 hrs
  98. Timothy Alderson, "TLL110"
      Sun 16:45, 0.03% imp, 0.00 hrs
  99. Niilo Sirola, "done tweaking"
      Sun 16:45, 0.33% imp, 0.60 hrs
 100. Tom Lemke, "done tweaking 001"
      Sun 17:21, 0.18% imp, 0.48 hrs
 101. Jan Langer, "probierung"
      Sun 17:50, 0.00% imp, 0.23 hrs
 102. Tom Lemke, "probierung 001"
      Sun 18:04, 0.01% imp, 0.21 hrs
 103. Jan Langer, "probierung && 1.5"
      Sun 18:16, 0.00% imp, 0.31 hrs
 104. Jan Langer, "probierung && 1.9"
      Sun 18:35, 0.04% imp, 0.07 hrs
 105. Jan Langer, "probierung && 1.95"
      Sun 18:39, 0.00% imp, 0.15 hrs
 106. Jan Langer, "probierung && 1.98 n12-30"
      Sun 18:48, 0.12% imp, 0.44 hrs
 107. Jan Langer, "probierung && 1.98 n12-24,28"
      Sun 19:15, 0.01% imp, 0.48 hrs
 108. Jan Langer, "probierung n13-20 23 28 v2"
      Sun 19:43, 0.06% imp, 0.09 hrs
 109. Jan Langer, "probierung n13-16,18-20 23 28"
      Sun 19:49, 0.01% imp, 0.62 hrs
 110. Jan Langer, "probierung except 28 lA>16"
      Sun 20:26, 0.00% imp, 0.04 hrs
 111. Jan Langer, "probierung except 28 lA>12"
      Sun 20:28, 0.00% imp, 0.02 hrs
 112. Jan Langer, "probierung except 28 lA>20b"
      Sun 20:29, 0.00% imp, 0.29 hrs
 113. Jan Langer, "nochn test"
      Sun 20:47, 0.57% imp, 0.03 hrs
 114. Jan Langer, "nochn test 2"
      Sun 20:49, 0.01% imp, 0.12 hrs
 115. Jan Langer, "nochn test 5"
      Sun 20:56, 0.05% imp, 1.01 hrs
 116. Jan Langer, "es ist nich schoen 3"
      Sun 21:57, 0.00% imp, 1.88 hrs
 117. Brian Jones, "problems"
      Sun 23:49, 0.00% imp, 0.34 hrs
 118. Khh, "testk"
      Mon 00:10, 0.00% imp, 1.91 hrs
 119. khh, "testk3"
      Mon 02:05, 0.02% imp, 4.04 hrs
 120. APhys, "OptMove110"
      Mon 06:07, 0.02% imp, 1.05 hrs
 121. Timothy Alderson, "TLL119"
      Mon 07:10, 0.00% imp, 2.49 hrs
 122. the cyclist, "Scrap heap"
      Mon 09:39, 0.00% imp, 1.50 hrs
 123. Timothy Alderson, "TLL128"
      Mon 11:09, 0.00% imp, 0.12 hrs
 124. the cyclist, "Trash 1"
      Mon 11:16, 0.00% imp, 0.37 hrs
 125. Timothy Alderson, "TLL129"
      Mon 11:39, 0.01% imp, 0.63 hrs
 126. Tom Lemke, "TLL128 001"
      Mon 12:16, 0.81% imp, 0.12 hrs
 127. the cyclist, "Just the factorials, ma'am"
      Mon 12:23, 0.02% imp, 0.01 hrs
 128. Tom Lemke, "TLL129 001"
      Mon 12:24, 0.05% imp, 1.39 hrs
 129. the cyclist, "Your secret name is Transpose-O"
      Mon 13:47, 0.01% imp, 9.46 hrs
 130. Timothy Alderson, "TLL145"
      Mon 23:15, 0.08% imp, 0.01 hrs
 131. Timothy Alderson, "TLL1146"
      Mon 23:16, 0.01% imp, 1.43 hrs
 132. Brian Jones, "pretty vacant"
      Tue 00:42, 0.06% imp, 1.35 hrs
 133. Stijn Helsen, "pretty vacant_"
      Tue 02:03, 0.00% imp, 0.90 hrs
 134. Stijn Helsen, "DperfectCalc_01"
      Tue 02:57, 0.01% imp, 0.09 hrs
 135. Stijn Helsen, "DperfectCalc_02"
      Tue 03:02, 0.01% imp, 0.39 hrs
 136. Stijn Helsen, "DperfectCalc_03___"
      Tue 03:26, 0.00% imp, 0.01 hrs
 137. Stijn Helsen, "DperfectCalc_04__"
      Tue 03:27, 0.01% imp, 0.16 hrs
 138. Stijn Helsen, "DperfectCalc_05"
      Tue 03:36, 0.01% imp, 1.57 hrs
 139. Jan Langer, "DperfectCalc_05 2raeder ab"
      Tue 05:10, 0.01% imp, 2.24 hrs
 140. Timothy Alderson, "TLL160"
      Tue 07:24, 0.01% imp, 1.10 hrs
 141. Niilo Sirola, "TLL 160 mod_ns1"
      Tue 08:30, 0.00% imp, 1.72 hrs
 142. Timothy Alderson, "TLL164"
      Tue 10:13, 0.02% imp, 1.87 hrs
 143. Timothy Alderson, "TLL172"
      Tue 12:06, 0.03% imp, 0.46 hrs
 144. Timothy Alderson, "TLL176"
      Tue 12:33, 0.01% imp, 3.75 hrs
 145. Timothy Alderson, "TLL191"
      Tue 16:18, 0.01% imp, 0.84 hrs
 146. christian ylamaki, "Some of this, some of that 2"
      Tue 17:09, 0.38% imp, 0.23 hrs
 147. wu zhili, "niceSeeNewThing"
      Tue 17:23, 0.63% imp, 0.61 hrs
 148. the cyclist, "Something old, something new"
      Tue 17:59, 0.28% imp, 1.81 hrs
 149. Timothy Alderson, "TLL199"
      Tue 19:48, 0.75% imp, 0.86 hrs
 150. Timothy Alderson, "TLL206"
      Tue 20:40, 0.05% imp, 1.04 hrs
 151. the cyclist, "New 1.15"
      Tue 21:42, 0.03% imp, 0.25 hrs
 152. Timothy Alderson, "TLL209"
      Tue 21:57, 0.17% imp, 0.19 hrs
 153. Timothy Alderson, "TLL210"
      Tue 22:08, 0.31% imp, 0.54 hrs
 154. Tristrom Cooke, "TLL210_Mod"
      Tue 22:41, 0.02% imp, 0.16 hrs
 155. the cyclist, "It Takes A Thief"
      Tue 22:50, 0.71% imp, 0.42 hrs
 156. Timothy Alderson, "TLL213"
      Tue 23:16, 0.07% imp, 0.22 hrs
 157. Timothy Alderson, "TLL215"
      Tue 23:29, 0.12% imp, 0.34 hrs
 158. the cyclist, "Harpo Marx"
      Tue 23:50, 0.09% imp, 0.32 hrs
 159. wu zhili, "restrestnow"
      Wed 00:09, 0.16% imp, 5.58 hrs
 160. wu zhili, "resume1"
      Wed 05:43, 0.02% imp, 0.13 hrs
 161. Timothy Alderson, "TLL224"
      Wed 05:51, 0.19% imp, 1.49 hrs
 162. Timothy Alderson, "TLL228"
      Wed 07:20, 0.20% imp, 0.25 hrs
 163. Timothy Alderson, "TLL230"
      Wed 07:35, 0.01% imp, 0.01 hrs
 164. Timothy Alderson, "TLL231"
      Wed 07:36, 0.09% imp, 1.20 hrs
 165. Niilo Sirola, "TLL231 mod_ns1"
      Wed 08:48, 0.02% imp, 0.42 hrs
 166. pedrillo, "copieteo3"
      Wed 09:13, 0.12% imp, 1.10 hrs
 167. Timothy Alderson, "TLL237"
      Wed 10:19, 0.00% imp, 0.03 hrs
 168. Timothy Alderson, "TLL238"
      Wed 10:20, 0.02% imp, 0.14 hrs
 169. Timothy Alderson, "TLL239"
      Wed 10:29, 0.01% imp, 1.50 hrs
 170. plindis, "ft"
      Wed 11:59, 0.02% imp, 1.00 hrs
 171. the cyclist, "ft counter"
      Wed 12:59, 0.32% imp, 1.42 hrs
 172. plindis, "st3"
      Wed 14:25, 0.00% imp, 1.88 hrs
 173. Timothy Alderson, "TLL250"
      Wed 16:18, 0.03% imp, 0.11 hrs
 174. Timothy Alderson, "TLL252"
      Wed 16:24, 0.01% imp, 0.44 hrs
 175. GUO, "asdf1"
      Wed 16:51, 0.01% imp, 0.14 hrs

Colophon

This contest analysis was calculated and published entirely from MATLAB. We used the Database Toolbox to pull the information directly from the contest database. This HTML document was automatically generated from a MATLAB script using "Publish to HTML", a feature introduced in R14.

Published with MATLAB® 7.0.2