Jeopardy question off the charts

[DaveC426913]

In a thousand years of trying I never would have gotten this Final Jeopardy question in 30 seconds.

Category: ANAGRAMS
One is a procedure foundational to Computer Science,
the other was made in large part obsolete by computers.

No Googling!

Oh yeah. You've got 30 seconds - go!

PM me with your answer. I'll post results after a bit.

Spoiler: Hint

(I surmised, based on difficulty, it would not be longer than about five letters. I was very wrong - by approximately a factor of 2.)

 

[Vanadium 50]

I can feel it in me bones!
(That should tell you I know the answer)

 

[DrGreg]

I eventually worked this out but I needed both clues from DaveC426913 and Vanadium 50 to point me in the right direction. And it took me a lot longer than 30 seconds.

 

[DaveC426913]

I can feel it in me bones!
(That should tell you I know the answer)

??
Your hint is too subtle for me (or it's not the same answer).

It's 9 letters (ten, if you pluralize them).

I'm not sure the second one is a technically accurate statement. I don't think computers made them obsolete.

 

[256bits]

i have an answer that fits, i think.
took about 5 minutes
9 letters also.

anybody get the answer on jeopardy, or was the question just a recipe for disaster.

 

[DaveC426913]

i have an answer that fits, i think.
took about 5 minutes
9 letters also.

anybody get the answer on jeopardy, or was the question just a recipe for disaster.

They all failed. It was a Champions game, with Amy and Mattaea and some guy.
Matthea bet the least and therefore lost by the least

 

[256bits]

They all failed. It was a Champions game, with Amy and Mattaea and some guy.
Matthea bet the least and therefore lost by the least

they will have to log it up to the too difficult to answer category.

 

[Hornbein]

I figured I'd give up immediately and just write "programming." But even if it's right I don't have the anagram so it wouldn't be accepted.

 

[Vanadium 50]

Your hint is too subtle for me

It's not a hint. It's more like a zero-knowledge proof. It is intended to work in one direction.

 

[hutchphd]

I only know this because I have a friend who often uses one of the pair when she means the other !!! I didn't realize they were anagrams until now. Also I squandered several minutes thinking about palindromes.....duh
i just got the "bones" reference from @Vanadium 50 .......very nice/

 

[DaveC426913]

Only 256 bits has figured it out so far - at least, to my clueless eyes.

 

[fresh_42]

I have an idea but I cannot see why the second one should be obsolete. And as someone who studied complexity theory, I find them even far more related than separated.

 

[DaveC426913]

I have an idea but I cannot see why the second one should be obsolete. And as someone who studied complexity theory, I find them even far more related than separated.

It might just be me.

Spoiler: Elaboration

I can see the answer being true if they said xxxxxxxxx tables, but surely computers do use xxxxxxxxxs.

 

[hutchphd]

at least, to my clueless eyes.

With respect to @Vanadium 50 clue I can only say "Who could ask for anything more?"

 

[DaveC426913]

With respect to @Vanadium 50 clue I can only say "Who could ask for anything more?"

I still dont think he's got it right.

 

[Ibix]

It might just be me.

Spoiler: Elaboration

I can see the answer being true if they said xxxxxxxxx tables, but surely computers do use xxxxxxxxxs.

Ah - got it. And it took me rather more than thirty seconds...

 

[Vanadium 50]

I have an idea but I cannot see why the second one should be obsolete

Because it is not.

 

[hutchphd]

Well they are obsolete in the sense I first learned about them. Clearly the mathematics is still correct. I cherish my slide rule.

 

[DaveC426913]

Well they are obsolete in the sense I first learned about them. Clearly the mathematics is still correct. I cherish my slide rule.

But but mechanical tool is not the mathematical function. The function is every bit as ... solete ... as ever. Right?

 

[Hornbein]

Having had twelve hours to think about it, my ideal Jeopardy answer would be

coffee
feecof

I wouldn't win but it would be legendary.

 

[DaveC426913]

Spoiler

Algorithm
Logarithm

I cannot imagine anyone coming up with this in 30 seconds.

But what is the consensus on the second half being true/untrue? I would say it is not true.

 

[Hornbein]

Spoiler

Algorithm
Logarithm

I cannot imagine anyone coming up with this in 30 seconds.

But what is the consensus on the second half being true/untrue? I would say it is not true.

It is true in the sense that nowadays everyone uses computers to multiply instead of looking up in log tables or using slide rules, and said computers don't use logarithms to multiply. But logarithms still have their uses and never will be obsolete. So the clue is bad. Better would be

One is a procedure foundational to Computer Science,
the other is a calculation tool replaced by computers.

That's still too hard.

One is a procedure foundational to Computer Science,
the other a multiplication technique replaced by computers.

I think that few would have a chance even with that -- ordinary people neither use nor remember high school math. Could I have answered that? I think not.


My view is that the question writers fell in love with their own cleverness and abused the contestants with a virtually impossible to answer question. Or maybe they had a deadline and punted. But I think these things are done far in advance to avoid such situations.

 

[DaveC426913]

It is true in the sense that nowadays everyone uses computers to do that.

But computers use logarithms.
Every programming language has a log() function just like it has an exp() function.

What computers made obsolete is log tables.

The clue is loosely analogous to saying computers made multiplication obsolete. No, computers made multiplication tables obsolete.

So the clue is bad. Better would be

One is a procedure foundational to Computer Science,
the other is a math tool now calculated via computers.

No , the tool is the slide rule or the table.

My view is that the question writers fell in love with their own cleverness and abused the contestants with a virtually impossible to answer question.

I concur.

If the words had been 5 letters or less, I think maybe they had a chance.

 

[Hornbein]

But computers use logarithms.

They don't use them to multiply. I learned all this fifty years ago. I looked it up just now to make sure.

But you are right, logarithms are fundamental, alive and well. They will never be obsolete. It's a bad clue.

No , the tool is the slide rule or the table.

Picky picky. I don't have enough interest to make it perfect. Maybe you can do better, but it's a dead issue so why bother.

 

[Baluncore]

Finding two terms, that are also anagrams, is not a human problem. It cannot be solved in 30 seconds, unless you have previously memorised the anagram clusters of the dictionary. There are some people who can do that, and they will win jeopardy.

I have invested in writing an anagram cluster generator for my dictionary. But I am distracted by the best way to sort the letters of a word into alphabetical order prior to re-sorting the list. (My brute force sort takes 26n comparisons). For example, the one word "alphabetical" becomes;
aaabcehillpt alphabetical

 

[Vanadium 50]

Finding two terms, that are also anagrams, is not a human problem. It cannot be solved in 30 seconds, unless you have previously memorised the anagram clusters of the dictionary. There are some people who can do that, and they will win jeopardy.

I disagree. That's how a computer would do it. A human would guess at one answer based on one of the two clues, and then see if there is an answer to the other clue.

In this case the first clue is pretty definitive. It's a procedure. And it's a procedure foundational, not just to computation but to computer science. One might or might not get it from this clue, but it;s not because there are thousands upon thousands of options.

As far as the 2nd clue being technically incorrect, well, anyone who gets that far knows what answer they are looking for.

 

[Baluncore]

A human would guess at one answer based on one of the two clues, and then see if there is an answer to the other clue.

The answer will be obvious once you know the answer.
The problem of guessing a correct first term increases with the number of terms you have available to select from, and the number of alternative interpretations you can see. Remember, it was not originally answered on Jeopardy.

 

[PeroK]

ChatGPT got it straight away. Just shows how dumb we humans are!

 

[Baluncore]

ChatGPT got it straight away. Just shows how dumb we humans are!

How many times had ChatGPT been posed the same question before you asked it?

 

[PeroK]

How many times had ChatGPT been posed the same question before you asked it?

Much of intelligence is processing what you already know and have seen before.

 

[Baluncore]

Me. "How many times has chatgpt been asked the jeopardy anagram question? One is a procedure foundational to Computer Science, the other was made in large part obsolete by computers."

ChatGPT. GOT IT WRONG, then;
"As for how many times this specific anagram question has been asked to ChatGPT, I don’t have exact numbers on how frequently specific questions are asked. However, it's a fairly well-known question due to its connection to classic knowledge in computer science and historical numeracy."

 

[PeroK]

Actually, I just realised the significance of my answer to the Jeopardy question which was;

AND
DNA

"And" being a logical procedure and DNA representing the organic beings becoming redundant. How Freudian is that?

 

[Baluncore]

DNA is not a word, it is an initialism.

 

[PeroK]

DNA is not a word, it is an initialism.

Like FFS.