ACF Nationals question thanks/discussion

Old college threads.
User avatar
Not That Kind of Christian!!
Yuna
Posts: 847
Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2007 10:36 pm
Location: Manhattan

Re: ACF Nationals question thanks/discussion

Post by Not That Kind of Christian!! » Tue Apr 28, 2009 10:53 pm

I was surprised at the preponderance of disease and disease-related questions that showed up in the submissions to this tournament; yeah, it might not have been smart to have two autoimmune disease tossups in the same tournament, but given how many disease-related questions were making it in anyway (because I felt better editing those than writing entirely new ones from scratch), I wouldn't have found it too egregious.
I only recall playing two disease tossups, Grave's and Wilson's diseases.
Hannah Kirsch
Brandeis University 2010
NYU School of Medicine 2014

"Wow, those Scandinavians completely thorbjorned my hard-earned political capital."

User avatar
Cheynem
Sin
Posts: 6514
Joined: Tue May 11, 2004 11:19 am
Location: Grand Rapids, Michigan

Re: ACF Nationals question thanks/discussion

Post by Cheynem » Tue Apr 28, 2009 11:31 pm

You didn't get chlamydia?
Mike Cheyne
Formerly U of Minnesota

"You killed HSAPQ"--Matt Bollinger

User avatar
Gautam
Auron
Posts: 1413
Joined: Sun Feb 11, 2007 7:28 pm
Location: Zone of Avoidance
Contact:

Re: ACF Nationals question thanks/discussion

Post by Gautam » Tue Apr 28, 2009 11:33 pm

Cheynem wrote:You didn't get chlamydia?
OWNED
Gautam - ACF
Currently tending to the 'quizbowl hobo' persuasion.

User avatar
cvdwightw
Auron
Posts: 3446
Joined: Tue May 13, 2003 12:46 am
Location: Southern CA
Contact:

Re: ACF Nationals question thanks/discussion

Post by cvdwightw » Tue Apr 28, 2009 11:35 pm

HKirsch wrote:I only recall playing two disease tossups, Grave's and Wilson's diseases.
You're right; I ended up counting immunology-related questions (e.g. interferons, CD antigens) in "disease-related." There were some bonus parts I considered as "disease-related" as well (e.g. ricin, botulism).
Dwight Wynne
socalquizbowl.org
UC Irvine 2008-2013; UCLA 2004-2007; Capistrano Valley High School 2000-2003

"It's a competition, but it's not a sport. On a scale, if football is a 10, then rowing would be a two. One would be Quiz Bowl." --Matt Birk on rowing, SI On Campus, 10/21/03

"If you were my teammate, I would have tossed your ass out the door so fast you'd be emitting Cerenkov radiation, but I'm not classy like Dwight." --Jerry

User avatar
Not That Kind of Christian!!
Yuna
Posts: 847
Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2007 10:36 pm
Location: Manhattan

Re: ACF Nationals question thanks/discussion

Post by Not That Kind of Christian!! » Wed Apr 29, 2009 12:47 am

gkandlikar wrote:
Cheynem wrote:You didn't get chlamydia?
OWNED
No, I didn't, because I always have safe quizbowl.

Forgot about that one, though. Still, Dwight's explanation of "disease" questions makes sense.
Hannah Kirsch
Brandeis University 2010
NYU School of Medicine 2014

"Wow, those Scandinavians completely thorbjorned my hard-earned political capital."

User avatar
recfreq
Wakka
Posts: 167
Joined: Mon Nov 07, 2005 10:11 pm
Location: Japan.

Re: ACF Nationals question thanks/discussion

Post by recfreq » Wed Apr 29, 2009 3:36 am

I suppose disease questions are easy to write if you don't have anything better; to be honest I think as much of them as "name this paleozoic period" questions. But if one wanted to keep the disease questions, one'd have some molecular clues to make them relevant, of which I believe there were at this tournament.
Ray Luo, UCLA.

User avatar
grapesmoker
Sin
Posts: 6365
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2003 5:23 pm
Location: NYC
Contact:

Re: ACF Nationals question thanks/discussion

Post by grapesmoker » Wed Apr 29, 2009 1:19 pm

recfreq wrote:I suppose disease questions are easy to write if you don't have anything better; to be honest I think as much of them as "name this paleozoic period" questions. But if one wanted to keep the disease questions, one'd have some molecular clues to make them relevant, of which I believe there were at this tournament.
I don't get it; do biologists not study diseases? There's a certain snottiness I detect among the MCB crowd to the tune of "we're real biologists and those other people are just hacks." If you don't know diseases I guess you won't be getting the tossup, but that's just like me not getting a tossup on condensed matter physics because that's not what I study.
Jerry Vinokurov
ex-LJHS, ex-Berkeley, ex-Brown, sorta-ex-CMU
code ape, loud voice, general nuissance

User avatar
Sima Guang Hater
Auron
Posts: 1849
Joined: Mon Feb 05, 2007 1:43 pm
Location: Philadelphia, PA

Re: ACF Nationals question thanks/discussion

Post by Sima Guang Hater » Wed Apr 29, 2009 1:33 pm

grapesmoker wrote: I don't get it; do biologists not study diseases?
Yeah. I don't see any problem with asking a tossup on Lupus, there's important molecular things going on there (to use a really broad term). Most diseases fall under this category, so I don't see any problems with having to know them. Wilson's disease tossups are a much worse idea; the only reason I can think of writing one is there was a House episode on it.
grapesmoker wrote:"we're real biologists and those other people are just hacks."
That's going on T-shirts. And F-shirts for our friends with two arms on the same side!
Eric Mukherjee, MD PhD
Washburn Rural High School, 2005
Brown University, 2009
Medical Scientist Training Program, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, 2018
Intern in Internal Medicine, Yale-Waterbury, 2018-9
Dermatology Resident, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, 2019-

Member Emeritus, ACF
Member, PACE
Writer, NAQT, NHBB, IQBT

"The next generation will always surpass the previous one. It's one of the never-ending cycles in life."

Susan
Forums Staff: Administrator
Posts: 1813
Joined: Fri Aug 15, 2003 12:43 am

Re: ACF Nationals question thanks/discussion

Post by Susan » Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:00 pm

grapesmoker wrote:
recfreq wrote:I suppose disease questions are easy to write if you don't have anything better; to be honest I think as much of them as "name this paleozoic period" questions. But if one wanted to keep the disease questions, one'd have some molecular clues to make them relevant, of which I believe there were at this tournament.
I don't get it; do biologists not study diseases? There's a certain snottiness I detect among the MCB crowd to the tune of "we're real biologists and those other people are just hacks." If you don't know diseases I guess you won't be getting the tossup, but that's just like me not getting a tossup on condensed matter physics because that's not what I study.
I was under the impression that most disease questions these days do have a lot of clues about molecular mechanisms and things like that. Maybe Ray's been hearing some old-timey-style questions that I haven't been hearing, but the complaint about disease questions seems more relevant to the disease questions of an older era.

Also, while many biologists do, in some sense, work on disease (or at least claim some sort of disease relevance to get $$$), sometimes it's in an awfully loose sense, and in a typical day, you don't conceptualize your work as being about breast cancer to the extent that you consider yourself to be studying Rad51-EVL interactions, to take one example. Unless you're in the process of writing about your work (grants, papers, theses) it can be easy to not think about it in the context of disease.
Susan
UChicago alum (AB 2003, PhD 2009)
Member emerita, ACF

User avatar
Not That Kind of Christian!!
Yuna
Posts: 847
Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2007 10:36 pm
Location: Manhattan

Re: ACF Nationals question thanks/discussion

Post by Not That Kind of Christian!! » Wed Apr 29, 2009 3:08 pm

myamphigory wrote: I was under the impression that most disease questions these days do have a lot of clues about molecular mechanisms and things like that.
This is definitely true. I'm not quite sure what you mean by "name these Paleozoic period" questions, but I think disease questions are in general less opaque and easier on the giveaway for non-science players than those pesky period tossups.
Hannah Kirsch
Brandeis University 2010
NYU School of Medicine 2014

"Wow, those Scandinavians completely thorbjorned my hard-earned political capital."

User avatar
naturalistic phallacy
Auron
Posts: 1347
Joined: Tue May 01, 2007 12:03 am
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Contact:

Re: ACF Nationals question thanks/discussion

Post by naturalistic phallacy » Wed Apr 29, 2009 4:33 pm

HKirsch wrote:
myamphigory wrote: I was under the impression that most disease questions these days do have a lot of clues about molecular mechanisms and things like that.
This is definitely true. I'm not quite sure what you mean by "name these Paleozoic period" questions, but I think disease questions are in general less opaque and easier on the giveaway for non-science players than those pesky period tossups.
This is true. It's a lot easier to learn about Barret's Esophagus than it is about amines. That said, writing on diseases must be done to reward science knowledge before "hey this was on House" knowledge.
Bernadette Spencer
University of Minnesota
MCTC
Event Manager, PACE

Father, among these many souls / Is there not one / Whom thou shalt pluck for love out of the coals?

wturner
Lulu
Posts: 33
Joined: Mon Jun 02, 2003 11:10 pm
Location: Ann Arbor, MI

Re: ACF Nationals question thanks/discussion

Post by wturner » Thu Apr 30, 2009 2:43 pm

I think the question on Boltzmann's constant contained an error. I believe it said that the Stokes-Einstein relation involves the chemical potential, which it does not. In said relation, mu stands for the mobility, not the chemical potential.

User avatar
Mechanical Beasts
Banned Cheater
Posts: 5673
Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2006 10:50 pm

Re: ACF Nationals question thanks/discussion

Post by Mechanical Beasts » Thu Apr 30, 2009 2:48 pm

wturner wrote:I think the question on Boltzmann's constant contained an error. I believe it said that the Stokes-Einstein relation involves the chemical potential, which it does not. In said relation, mu stands for the mobility, not the chemical potential.
Yeah, I remember this happening; it was a little confusing but thankfully immaterial.
Andrew Watkins

User avatar
minor_character
Lulu
Posts: 54
Joined: Mon Apr 28, 2008 2:52 pm

Re: ACF Nationals question thanks/discussion

Post by minor_character » Thu Apr 30, 2009 3:24 pm

wturner wrote:I think the question on Boltzmann's constant contained an error. I believe it said that the Stokes-Einstein relation involves the chemical potential, which it does not. In said relation, mu stands for the mobility, not the chemical potential.
You're right in that the Stoke-Einstein relation does not involve the chemical potential. However, the relation is apparently identical to the force arising from a chemical potential gradient, which is what I misread when writing the question. Sorry.

http://books.google.com/books?id=zJzJvs ... t&resnum=6
Last edited by minor_character on Thu Apr 30, 2009 3:30 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Andrew Alexander
VCU Quizbowl

User avatar
MLafer
Tidus
Posts: 519
Joined: Mon Apr 28, 2003 7:00 pm

Re: ACF Nationals question thanks/discussion

Post by MLafer » Thu Apr 30, 2009 3:25 pm

edited version:

According to the Stokes-Einstein relation, the Brownian diffusion of a particle under the influence of a chemical potential gradient is directly proportional to both temperature and this other value. The Kelvin scale is derived by multiplying the fundamental temperature by this value, and in the Eyring equation, it is divided by Planck’s constant. The average kinetic energy of a gas is equal to 3/2 times temperature times this value. It multiplies the natural log of the microcanonical partition function to yield the entropy in an equation inscribed on its namesake’s tombstone. For 10 points, name this constant that equals the gas constant divided by Avogadro’s constant, often symbolized k.

ANSWER: Boltzmann’s constant
Matt Lafer
Plymouth Salem 1997-2001
University of Michigan 2001-2005

User avatar
grapesmoker
Sin
Posts: 6365
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2003 5:23 pm
Location: NYC
Contact:

Re: ACF Nationals question thanks/discussion

Post by grapesmoker » Thu Apr 30, 2009 4:40 pm

MLafer wrote:edited version:

According to the Stokes-Einstein relation, the Brownian diffusion of a particle under the influence of a chemical potential gradient is directly proportional to both temperature and this other value. The Kelvin scale is derived by multiplying the fundamental temperature by this value, and in the Eyring equation, it is divided by Planck’s constant. The average kinetic energy of a gas is equal to 3/2 times temperature times this value. It multiplies the natural log of the microcanonical partition function to yield the entropy in an equation inscribed on its namesake’s tombstone. For 10 points, name this constant that equals the gas constant divided by Avogadro’s constant, often symbolized k.

ANSWER: Boltzmann’s constant
This isn't a good questions because k_b multiplies temperature essentially everywhere that it appears.
Jerry Vinokurov
ex-LJHS, ex-Berkeley, ex-Brown, sorta-ex-CMU
code ape, loud voice, general nuissance

User avatar
Mechanical Beasts
Banned Cheater
Posts: 5673
Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2006 10:50 pm

Re: ACF Nationals question thanks/discussion

Post by Mechanical Beasts » Thu Apr 30, 2009 4:46 pm

It's also a constant, right? So saying that something's directly proportional to it and temperature... well, I thought the question had to be going for some other quantity, with the constant of proportionality either being Boltzmann's or Boltzmann's and some other stuff. Maybe my terminology's bad because I never learned this stuff formally, but I'd not have said "directly proportional to" the product of a constant and something, since it's also true that it's directly proportional to half that constant, or (very much so) to R, or...
Andrew Watkins

User avatar
MLafer
Tidus
Posts: 519
Joined: Mon Apr 28, 2003 7:00 pm

Re: ACF Nationals question thanks/discussion

Post by MLafer » Thu Apr 30, 2009 5:13 pm

Looking at it, it is a pretty bad question. I agree with Andrew that saying something is directly proportional to a constant is pretty nonsensical and the Kelvin clue is too early.

Full disclosure: I did not do any editing on this question, and probably should have because the clues are clearly more physics-oriented than chemistry, but I skipped over it because a) there was already a physics question in the packet (perturbation theory) and b) Dwight had written a comment on the content of the question, which he didn't do for any other physics question in the entire set, as far as i know, so i subconsciously skipped over it. In the end I'm not sure if Dwight considered this a chemistry question or not but obviously somebody got to it.
Matt Lafer
Plymouth Salem 1997-2001
University of Michigan 2001-2005

User avatar
grapesmoker
Sin
Posts: 6365
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2003 5:23 pm
Location: NYC
Contact:

Re: ACF Nationals question thanks/discussion

Post by grapesmoker » Thu Apr 30, 2009 5:45 pm

It would be great if the questions were posted somewhere. I have some comments I wanted to make about the questions and would like to be able to cite specifics.
Jerry Vinokurov
ex-LJHS, ex-Berkeley, ex-Brown, sorta-ex-CMU
code ape, loud voice, general nuissance

User avatar
cvdwightw
Auron
Posts: 3446
Joined: Tue May 13, 2003 12:46 am
Location: Southern CA
Contact:

Re: ACF Nationals question thanks/discussion

Post by cvdwightw » Thu Apr 30, 2009 6:03 pm

MLafer wrote:Full disclosure: I did not do any editing on this question, and probably should have because the clues are clearly more physics-oriented than chemistry, but I skipped over it because a) there was already a physics question in the packet (perturbation theory) and b) Dwight had written a comment on the content of the question, which he didn't do for any other physics question in the entire set, as far as i know, so i subconsciously skipped over it. In the end I'm not sure if Dwight considered this a chemistry question or not but obviously somebody got to it.
Yeah, I did edit it as chem, although I'm not sure whether I should have. In any case, the Ostwald question was superior to it as chem and I think the perturbation theory question was probably superior as physics. Again, this was an issue of someone (in this case me) letting in a weaker question at the expense of a superior question in that category.
Dwight Wynne
socalquizbowl.org
UC Irvine 2008-2013; UCLA 2004-2007; Capistrano Valley High School 2000-2003

"It's a competition, but it's not a sport. On a scale, if football is a 10, then rowing would be a two. One would be Quiz Bowl." --Matt Birk on rowing, SI On Campus, 10/21/03

"If you were my teammate, I would have tossed your ass out the door so fast you'd be emitting Cerenkov radiation, but I'm not classy like Dwight." --Jerry

User avatar
Matt Weiner
Sin
Posts: 8411
Joined: Fri Apr 11, 2003 8:34 pm
Location: Richmond, VA

Re: ACF Nationals question thanks/discussion

Post by Matt Weiner » Sat May 02, 2009 3:27 pm

Questions as used are up at http://www.hsquizbowl.org/acfn09.zip. There's probably a small handful of mechanical things I'd like to fix there, so if you see anything that really bugs you let me know and I'll clean it up before I send it to the archive.
Matt Weiner
Founder of hsquizbowl.org

User avatar
grapesmoker
Sin
Posts: 6365
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2003 5:23 pm
Location: NYC
Contact:

Re: ACF Nationals question thanks/discussion

Post by grapesmoker » Sun May 03, 2009 6:41 am

The set is now also posted on QBDB
Jerry Vinokurov
ex-LJHS, ex-Berkeley, ex-Brown, sorta-ex-CMU
code ape, loud voice, general nuissance

Batsteve
Lulu
Posts: 35
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2009 9:59 pm
Contact:

Re: ACF Nationals question thanks/discussion

Post by Batsteve » Sun May 03, 2009 3:51 pm

Looking back at the question on the Halting Problem, I believe Chaitin's constant was name-dropped far too early. I recognize that computer science has far, far from a fleshed out canon, but to me Chaitin's constant comes second only to "undecidable" and "something stopping" for the definition of the Halting Problem. I buzzed off that, and I don't think there's anything else I could have buzzed off (maybe "undecidability," or just guessing based on "this is a popular problem associated with Turing Machines") before the giveaway.
SteveJon
Unaffiliated

User avatar
The Toad to Wigan Pier
Tidus
Posts: 528
Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2005 6:58 pm
Location: Seattle

Re: ACF Nationals question thanks/discussion

Post by The Toad to Wigan Pier » Sun May 03, 2009 7:16 pm

Batsteve wrote:Looking back at the question on the Halting Problem, I believe Chaitin's constant was name-dropped far too early. I recognize that computer science has far, far from a fleshed out canon, but to me Chaitin's constant comes second only to "undecidable" and "something stopping" for the definition of the Halting Problem. I buzzed off that, and I don't think there's anything else I could have buzzed off (maybe "undecidability," or just guessing based on "this is a popular problem associated with Turing Machines") before the giveaway.
Looking at that tossup, I agree with you that Chaitin's constant is way to early in the question, but what is actually worse is that the clue directly before it is Rice's Theorem which is even more important that Chaitin's constant.
William Butler
UVA '11
Georgia Tech 13

User avatar
Auks Ran Ova
Forums Staff: Chief Administrator
Posts: 4027
Joined: Sun Apr 30, 2006 10:28 pm
Location: Minneapolis
Contact:

Re: ACF Nationals question thanks/discussion

Post by Auks Ran Ova » Sun May 03, 2009 7:23 pm

The Toad to Wigan Pier wrote:
Batsteve wrote:Looking back at the question on the Halting Problem, I believe Chaitin's constant was name-dropped far too early. I recognize that computer science has far, far from a fleshed out canon, but to me Chaitin's constant comes second only to "undecidable" and "something stopping" for the definition of the Halting Problem. I buzzed off that, and I don't think there's anything else I could have buzzed off (maybe "undecidability," or just guessing based on "this is a popular problem associated with Turing Machines") before the giveaway.
Looking at that tossup, I agree with you that Chaitin's constant is way to early in the question, but what is actually worse is that the clue directly before it is Rice's Theorem which is even more important that Chaitin's constant.
Yeah, Rice's Theorem was the out-of-place clue that really surprised me.
Rob Carson
University of Minnesota '11, MCTC '??
Member, ACF
Member, PACE
Writer and Editor, NAQT

The Atom Strikes!
Tidus
Posts: 612
Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2007 7:05 pm
Location: Houston, Texas

Re: ACF Nationals question thanks/discussion

Post by The Atom Strikes! » Wed May 20, 2009 11:39 pm

I know this is a bit late, but the tossup on "The Glass-Bead Game" in the Illinois/Maryland packet is incorrect-- it is Fritz Tegularius, not Thomas van der Trave, who is the Nietzche analogue. Van der Trave is actually analogous to Mann.
Henry Gorman, Wilmington Charter '09, Rice '13, PhD History Vanderbilt '1X

Locked