- Joined
- Nov 17, 2004
- Messages
- 1,920
- Reaction score
- 122
OH! Hahahahahha clever. I guess she could go for 19 too.
What's sad is many people waiting for Match Day weren't even in high school yet when that movie came out. I feel old.
OH! Hahahahahha clever. I guess she could go for 19 too.
What's in the box(/envelope)? Haha, thinking about this, could be incredibly relevant to match day...
(If you haven't seen this, serious spoiler alert.)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1giVzxyoclE
I suppose finding you're unmatched could be the equivalent of finding your wife's head in a box. But probably not. Besides, the 'box' day is in 3 days, not 7.
Ooops. Um, spoiler alert. Sorry.
I this movie. The ending of knocking out two deadly sins at once was brilliant.
SOAP-eligible! Woo......hoo?
Interesting article on the NRMP system-it appears it only takes 10 minutes to run the algorithm.
http://www.readwriteweb.com/hack/2012/03/nervous-medical-students-await.php
It should take a lot less. And is it seriously written in Visual Basic? Yikes.
With some of my 4th year downtime I wrote a quick script simulating the main match.
It took 12 seconds on my MacBook Air with the conditions in that article (27000 applicants, 4000 programs, programs have 2-12 spots for an average of 6, each applicant "interviews" at 20 programs and ranks them all, each program ranks every applicant who "interviews").
Adding in prelim positions should just be like running the whole match a second time with fewer applicants and programs.
Adding in the couple's match shouldn't add too much complexity either.
It should run in less than a minute on any reasonably powered machine/smartphone.
They wouldn't be able to justify us paying hundreds/thousands of dollars on the process if they just ran it a couple times (to make sure there weren't errors) in 10 minutes and reported the results?
There's no point in running the algorithm more than once - it comes up with a unique solution.
From what I understood is that the algorithm should produce the same results each time it is run even if it is only done once.
http://kuznets.harvard.edu/~aroth/papers/JAMA.OriginsAndHistoryNRMP.Roth.pdf
That was what I said... there is a unique solution. Doesn't matter how many times you run it, you'll always find the same one.
But that's even more reason to run it more than once to make sure that regardless of the way data is analyzed or the order in which data was entered, the solution is indeed unique.... So if on the third run the algorithm comes up with some different answer, then you know there is a glitch.
Not really. Only thing that could catch would be a mistake in the implementation of the algorithm - that should have been troubleshooted well before the match.
Unless you change the input, the output won't change, and you won't catch input errors with repeated runs.
Hey all have been following all your threads.
Thank you for sharing all the info.
I tried logging onto the nrmp website with my AaMC ID and password and for some reason it's not letting me logg on. Am unable to change the username password also. Last logged on a few weeks ago for certifying ROL. Wondering if anyone else is having the same problem?
Panicked ms4
tried logging in this morning and had the same issue. password and everything 100% correct. worked after the 3rd or 4th try.
very weird.
Only if you run it in the same order everytime.there is a unique solution. Doesn't matter how many times you run it, you'll always find the same one.
Only if you run it in the same order everytime.
What's weird is that if you read Roth and Peranson's original algorithm article (http://www.bepress.com/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1016&context=wilson), it states small variations in the matches if programs and applicants are processed in a different order. Meaning that I could have potentially go to a different program if they processed it in a different order (although quite low...I think they said somewhere around 2-3 program differences in filling).
I would hope they would run the program in every conceivable order to optimize number of matches (computation should still only take a day or so) so that the least # of slot go unfilled; but I expect they run it in the same order every year to have "consistency".
I actually don't care as long as I match, just thought order entry effecting the match was interesting.
I remember reading that before. It isn't readily apparent to me why the order matters. Does anyone have a test case showing this effect?
Only if you run it in the same order everytime.
What's weird is that if you read Roth and Peranson's original algorithm article (http://www.bepress.com/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1016&context=wilson), it states small variations in the matches if programs and applicants are processed in a different order. Meaning that I could have potentially go to a different program if they processed it in a different order (although quite low...I think they said somewhere around 2-3 program differences in filling).
I would hope they would run the program in every conceivable order to optimize number of matches (computation should still only take a day or so) so that the least # of slot go unfilled; but I expect they run it in the same order every year to have "consistency".
I actually don't care as long as I match, just thought order entry effecting the match was interesting.
Good luck tomorrow everyone.