The 2013 ACM ICPC East Central North America Regional Programming Contest (ACM ICPC ECNA RPC) was held on Saturday, November 9, 2012. We had 126 teams from 61 colleges and universities throughout western Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan, eastern Ontario, and Indiana (excluding the Greater Chicago Metropolitan Area).
As it was difficult for some teams in the ECNA region to travel to a single site for the contest, the ECNA RPC was held as a distributed contest. There were four contest sites:
- University of Cincinnati in Cincinnati, Ohio (33 teams from 15 schools)
- Grand Valley State University in Allendale, Michigan (26 teams from 13 schools)
- University of Windsor in Windsor, Ontario (21 teams from 11 schools)
- Youngstown State University in Youngstown, Ohio (46 teams from 22 schools)
We are pleased to report that the ECNA RPC was successful this year. Here are a few comments and observations:
- The software development environment was based on the environment being prepared for the ACM ICPC World Finals. This is a significant improvement over the previous environment.
- Version 9.3beta of the PC^2 Contest Control System was used to run the Contest. It was noted during system testing that some clarification responses were not being received. A backup system was devised to ensure that teams received clarifications in a timely manner. No reports of missing responses were received during the practice or actual contest.
- The contest started at 10:00:01 EST and ended at 15:00:01 EST. A protocol was in place to eliminate the contest start issues that arose last year. The protocol was successful and all teams were ready before the contest began.
- The contest consisted of 9 problems with 113 teams solving at least one problem.
- The maximum number of problems solved by any team was 7 problems.
- Early in the contest, the judges discovered that an option set in the C++
compiler caused issues with some programs. The option was –std=gnu++0x.
- Initially, a Compile Time Error judgment was given to an otherwise correct program.
- Once the cause was determined to be the –std option, the submission was rejudged without the option and determined to be correct.
- A decision was made to remove the setting from future judgments.
- This caused a subsequent erroneous Compile Time Error judgment for a later submission.
- This second submission was rejudged with the setting in place and the outcome was Wrong Answer.
- After that, the judges compiled C++ programs without the –std option, recompiling and testing by hand any Compile Time Error outcomes.
Links to the problem set and scoreboard are available on the sidebar. Standings for each site are available at the scoreboard link.
Congratulations to the following teams on their awards:
- Jolly Jumpers (highest jump in rank from the previous year)
SAU Cougar Red, jumping from 78th place in 2012 to 36th place
- Extreme Programmers (earliest correct solution)
UTSC, solving problem B in 0:15
- Steadfast Gurus (last correct solution)
Albino Squirrels, solving problem C with 4 minutes remaining
- Solid Programmers, solving the most problems with fewest
Purdue Xenon, making two submissions, both correct
- Relentless Programmers (most attempts before correct solution)
Team Magma, solving problem C on their 7th attempt
Note: Teams are only eligible to win one prize.