Курс на Stepik
Обложка курса «Bioinformatics Contest 2017» на Stepik
Бесплатно

Bioinformatics Contest 2017 ★ 4.250

Открыть на
STEPIK.ORG

Bioinformatics Contest 2017

Показатель Текущие показатели Рост
Значение 🏆 Рейтинг 3 дн 7 дн 30 дн
Количество учеников на курсе «Bioinformatics Contest 2017»Учеников на курсе 4 754
Сертификаты, выданные на курсе «Bioinformatics Contest 2017»Сертификатов выдано 0
Отзывы о курсе «Bioinformatics Contest 2017»Отзывов получено 4
Рейтинг курса «Bioinformatics Contest 2017»Рейтинг курса 4.250
Уроки в курсе «Bioinformatics Contest 2017»Количество уроков 11
Тесты в курсе «Bioinformatics Contest 2017»Количество квизов 36
Задачи с кодом в курсе «Bioinformatics Contest 2017»Количество задач с кодом 9
Время прохождения курса «Bioinformatics Contest 2017»Время прохождения курса —
Обновления курса «Bioinformatics Contest 2017»Обновления курса — —
Дата публикации курса «Bioinformatics Contest 2017»Дата публикации курса — ———
Последнее обновление курса «Bioinformatics Contest 2017»Последнее обновление — ———
4.250 ★
из 5
4 отзыва
★★★★★
3
★★★★★
0
★★★★★
0
★★★★★
1
★★★★★
0
Ognjen Milicevic
Ognjen Milicevic •
★ ★ ★ ★ ★
• 9 лет назад

Good and creative competition, an excellent exercise for both the experienced and fresh coders. I would only like to point out that some of the exercises are universal algorithmic problems wrapped in a bioinformatic shell, so they might be of interest to a wider audience.

David Eccles (gringer)
David Eccles (gringer) •
★ ★ ★ ★ ★
• 9 лет назад

Problem 3 was great: problem sets that are derived from biological data, with partial points awarded to partial solutions, a nice ramp from something that can be solved with pen and paper to something that required a completely automated solution. Also, answers were independent -- the answer to one problem was not the same as the answer to any other problem. The other problems, not so much. Almost everything that was good about problem 3 was bad about problems 1 and 2. A solution to the "tricky" version could be identical to a solution to the "easy" version, and no partial points were awarded despite the solutions going through a series of tests that could have partial points attached to them. The biological basis of problems 1&2 is also very strained. This is especially obvious in the case of problem 2, where the problem designers needed to weasel around with their definition of what constitutes a hydrogen bond, and what constitutes an RNA sequence. I recommend that the problem designers for problem 2 go back and revisit their knowledge of biology, maybe trying out some RNA secondary structure Rosalind problems, such as this one: http://rosalind.info/problems/RNAS/