CAT 2006: Formulae for Error-correction

[Neha Dua]

i agree wid u..d best possible way is 2 calculate d percentiles 4 each set seperately...i was also one of d unfortunate ppl who got 111 set n ended up wasting a lot of time.

[on_da_rox]

so much creativity and logic has been applied here,& yet,each n every solution has one flaw or the other. it is pretty evident that whatver solution is applied,there is bound to be a section of test-takers who would suffer negatively (the extent depends) . IIM people are also human (they made the erroneous CAT -06 ). So its evident that whatvere solution they would adopt,wherther a simple scrapping of questions or a complicated statistical formulae,it would be on the principle - the greatest good for the greatest number. They will not be able to satisy all,that much is evident form the discusion upto now.
The set segregation idea for calls doesnt seem practical,because all the call-deservers may not be equally divided amongst the sets. But the idea of extrapolating marks,judging from attempts & accuracy in that section may augur well for every1. And for the horrible verbal,the idea of awarding max marks to the most apt answer,then 3 marx to the next one,2 to the third suitable one (if applicable) sounds good. Because never in my life shall i be able to figure out this verbal.

Adios,guys
Hope fer a favourable formula :lookroun:

[Plumber]

Originally Posted by on_da_rox

IIM people are also human (they made the erroneous CAT -06 ). So its evident that whatvere solution they would adopt,wherther a simple scrapping of questions or a complicated statistical formulae,it would be on the principle - the greatest good for the greatest number.

Adios,guys
Hope fer a favourable formula :lookroun:

The formula has come out dood! You are a bit late, much late infact. IIMs were done with deciding this formula much before this thread was started.

[on_da_rox]

Originally Posted by Plumber

The formula has come out dood! You are a bit late, much late infact. IIMs were done with deciding this formula much before this thread was started.

Oh yeah?
Does my or your being late or early make an iota of difference to the formula? Or for that matter,does anyone else's say counts? No.Whatever the IIMs say,we accept it. With a pinch of salt if its unfavourable.
But for the sake of discussing,we all put in our 2 pences over here... As on any other issue,like %iles,calls etc etc
But finally, IIM is the ultimate authority. Jan 2 is the day of reckoning.
Adios guyz

[Plumber]

Originally Posted by on_da_rox

Oh yeah?
Does my or your being late or early make an iota of difference to the formula? Or for that matter,does anyone else's say counts? No.Whatever the IIMs say,we accept it. With a pinch of salt if its unfavourable.
But for the sake of discussing,we all put in our 2 pences over here... As on any other issue,like %iles,calls etc etc
But finally, IIM is the ultimate authority. Jan 2 is the day of reckoning.
Adios guyz

The formula has been decided and announced as well is what i am trying to say. kindly check out other threads; they have scrapped the error-ridden questions. get a complete picture on the other threads. I thought you have missed those threads and that's why made that post.

And yes it's futile to discuss formula NOW just as you don't discuss percentile-predictions after the actual percentiles come out.

[on_da_rox]

Originally Posted by Plumber

The formula has been decided and announced as well is what i am trying to say. kindly check out other threads; they have scrapped the error-ridden questions. get a complete picture on the other threads. I thought you have missed those threads and that's why made that post.

And yes it's futile to discuss formula NOW just as you don't discuss percentile-predictions after the actual percentiles come out.

Gotcha buddy...
I did miss the formula thread earlier,but ive caught on now.
Seems like the earliest & simplest possible solution has been taken up,no complicated mathematical/statistical for the IIMs...
dunno how it augurs for me tho...looks like now i have 55 out of 88 marks.or is it 92 (in QA)...
newayz,thanx for pointing out

[Plumber]

Originally Posted by on_da_rox

Gotcha buddy...
...
Seems like the earliest & simplest possible solution has been taken up

Simple and simplistic as well.

[Mackenna]

Deleted...due to similar post in other thread.

[Manish Salian]

Hi,

Today's TOI carries an article (at least in their Mumbai edition) about IIM's admitting to the errors in CAT the paper! It has put all the speculation about a possible re-test to rest! Also, you may stop giving those formale for correction

Although, any decision in the light of this would be unfair to some group or another (and in some way or another), a retest would have been the worst of all the decisions! As I have seen the plight of students in 2003, when over a lakh students had to suffer a retest, just because a few hundreds took advantage of the leak!

I am glad that there would not be a retest! They will be simply ignoring the questions that had errors. This seems to be a fair decision.

So here is how your score would be calculated:

If you had series: 111 and 333, your quant section would have 23 Q's and if you had the series 222 and 444, your quant section would have 24 Q's.

In addition, if you had the series 444, your verbal section would also have 24 Q's.

In other words, question paper sets 111, 333 and 444 would have 73 valid Q's in all, but 222 will have 74 valid Q's.

Now, how are they going to calculate the percentiles, would be interesting to note, as the students with set 222 would clearly be at an advantage of 1 Q!!

Let us all wait and watch!

Regards,

Manish sir

[sunilnatraj]

@Mr. Manish
Personally, retest shouldnt have been a viable option.

and the guys with the 222 set actually are set to lose. Not gain.