Programming Competition: Results

These are the current best scores. The competition is ongoing so get those entries in!

Category I

With local search, I've achieved 51.53. With simulated annealing, I've achieved 51.53. Devin Kilminster has suggested this could be the optimal solution and is currently running an exhaustive search to prove this. A straight frequency ordering gives 47.93.

• Mark Ellison — 1st Attempt (51.53)
• Didier Barbas — 1st Attempt (46.1)
• Tennessee Leeuwenburg — 2nd Attempt (44.53)
• ...
• ...

Category II

With local search starting with frequency ordering, I get 116.34. With simulated annealing, I've achieved 116.8. A straight frequency ordering gives 106.19.

• Devin Kilminster — 1st Attempt (116.82)
• Mark Ellison — 2nd Attempt (116.65)
• Mark Ellison — 1st Attempt (116.42)
• Tennessee Leeuwenburg — 2nd Attempt (103.08)
• Tim Wegener — 3rd Attempt (102.2)

Category III

With local search, I've achieved 602.74. With simulated annealing, I've achieved 606.47. A straight frequency ordering gives 568.98.

• Devin Kilminster — 2nd Attempt (606.79)
• Devin Kilminster — 1st Attempt (606.25)
• Mark Ellison — 2nd Attempt (605.85)
• Mark Ellison — 1st Attempt (604.50)
• Tennessee Leeuwenburg — 2nd Attempt (583.98)

Category IV

A straight frequency ordering gives 3470.49.

• Zellyn Hunter — 1st Attempt (3610.58)
• Mark Ellison — 2nd Attempt (3604.81)
• William Bardon — 2nd Attempt (3570.50)
• William Bardon — 1st Attempt (3567.61)
• Mark Ellison — 1st Attempt (3535.15)