Physics paper guessing game: Are you worse than a monkey?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around a game where players guess which of two paper titles is real, with one title generated automatically. Players can continue guessing indefinitely, and their performance is ranked from "worse than a monkey" to "Nobel prize winner" based on accuracy. Participants share their experiences, with some achieving high scores and others struggling. Strategies such as randomly clicking or relying on prior knowledge of papers are mentioned, highlighting the game's mix of skill and luck. The game is praised for its entertainment value and challenge, with players enjoying the humorous rankings based on their performance.
D H
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
Insights Author
Messages
15,524
Reaction score
769
The concept of the game: You are presented with the titles of two papers. One paper is a real one posted at the arXiv. The other is fake, with the title automatically generated using a context-free grammar. Your job: Guess which is the real paper. After guessing you will be presented with another pair of titles. You can play as long as you want. The game will give you a ranking based on your ability to ferret out the real physics papers versus the fake ones. Do slightly worse than 50% and you are ranked "worse than a monkey". Dropping down even lower makes you a "ninth year graduate student". Do well and you will rise to the rank of "undergraduate" and may eventually achieve the rank of "Nobel prize winner".

Here is the website: http://snarxiv.org/vs-arxiv/.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
:smile: You made my day. (And I'm pretty good at picking the 'winners', apparently. Racked up a Nobel prize. :cool:)
 
I'm an undergraduate.

Well at least I'm at the right level for my current education status.
 
Woah... I'm stumped by my first one. I feel like an idiot! This game is awesome.
 
I went 10 for 10, but I had read 4 of the real papers so I am not so sure it counts.
 
Vanadium 50 said:
I went 10 for 10, but I had read 4 of the real papers so I am not so sure it counts.

I was 6 for 6... then 6 for 7... then 6 for 8... then 6 for 9... then 6 for 10...

Then I just started clicking the left side each time.

Now I'm 16 for 22?
 
I got to 7 out of 7 just clicking the right side without even reading the title, suspect it might be slightly biased :).
 
Got to love it, I just kept clicking right this time and got "Ed, is that you?" 10 out of 10.
 
I just tried the "click right scheme" and got some hilarious ratings.

0 out of 5: Guess harder.
1 out of 6: Crackpot.
2 out of 7: LHC doomsayer.
2 out of 8: Nice round number.
3 out of 9: Worse than a monkey.
3 out of 10: Try using AdS/CFT.
12 out of 30: 9th year graduate student.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top