* Honours Maths paper 1 * AFTERMATH

bren2001

Gumbi wrote: »

I thought 2c was very manageable (I didn't get the final part fully, though). My problems were in 8, where I messed up in the bs (also, I didn't know how to find the area of a disc), and c in 7. I got full marks, hopefully, in q6.

I think it was the wording of the qs that threw a lot of people off in some cases. A pity no proofs came up, as I had them all well prepared.

2(c) if you "completed the square" (I hate that term) you got (i) and (ii) no problem. (iii) required a bit of thinking and using part (i) and (ii) of course.

8 (b) was actually quite easy (for this paper) and hopefully you will learn for paper 2 LEARN YOUR PROOFS

7 (c) again was tricky. No easy way to do it, helpful they give you the answer and (ii) you just have to know when you differentiate you get the slope and then apply your understanding; or just test points on each graph.

6 (b) people forget the derivative is -2xe^x2, the forget the 2x. (c) was easy if you know asymptotes, again you have to realise when you differentiate you get the slope.

aranciata

To be fair, circular integrals are on the course. (a few of us were on boards last night and went over it - i did that 1999 question!) I do think they should have given the hint though, it's difficult enough to remember to change the limits, that should have been the trick of the question - much fairer IMO.

Q7c(iii) had no business being on that paper though, stupid, stupid question. I'm glad I didn't spend too much time on it.


(my views are likely biased, 8(c) was one of the two part Cs i got fully, or almost fully right!)

PseudoFamous

Maybe_Memories wrote: »

even by my standards

I've been wondering for a while now what your standards are, not that I'm being ungrateful.. Maths teacher? Maths grad? Simply interested in maths?

Patriciamc93

aranciata wrote: »

To be fair, circular integrals are on the course. (a few of us were on boards last night and went over it - i did that 1999 question!) I do think they should have given the hint though, it's difficult enough to remember to change the limits, that should have been the trick of the question - much fairer IMO.

Q7c(iii) had no business being on that paper though, stupid, stupid question. I'm glad I didn't spend too much time on it.


(my views are likely biased, 8(c) was one of the two part Cs i got fully, or almost fully right!)

there is nothing about a disc in 1999!!

mikeydublin

So i mean, after all the talk about todays paper , it being a disaster or 'im going to fail' came to terms with alot of people.
Now i know it is only after maths paper 1 and of course maths paper 2 still has to come, and this new course coming in, but will this be the trend for years to come?
I seen maths in this country has slipped through the ranks from being mid level in the charts and it is landsliding in recent times.
I think people should be coming out of these exams with confidence but this is clearly not the case (certainly in honours and i seen many felt the same in ordinary)
Are people just losing there head with stress and that? Or is this a very serious matter?

Maybe_Memories

PseudoFamous wrote: »

I've been wondering for a while now what your standards are, not that I'm being ungrateful.. Maths teacher? Maths grad? Simply interested in maths?

Going into second year pure maths in TCD

PJelly

Patriciamc93 wrote: »

there is nothing about a disc in 1999!!

There's a circular integral. Which that proof ends up being.

Gumbi

drg85 wrote: »

I drew the graphs in Matlab, I'm aware the function is valid, but clarity is the issue here - the slash notation isn't covered at LC level afaik, so x E R \ {-1,0} is more likely to be read as the valid domain, which is unfair. In fact, it took me a read there to actually see it, I can only imagine how an exam student felt. In any case, you do need to know the arctan of an undefined function as graph A clearly shows the function evaluated at x = 0, which gives rise to the situation.

I know from students in the room that it really threw them, and for that reason I think it's unfair and far too technical.

I didn't understand that slash First time I've ever seen it.

Maybe_Memories

Patriciamc93 wrote: »

there is nothing about a disc in 1999!!

The thing they gave you with the square root of whatever minus x squared is the equation of a semi circle

aranciata

Patriciamc93 wrote: »

there is nothing about a disc in 1999!!

true, but i wouldn't expect them to repeat a question, especially not on this paper.. i almost got caught out trying to integrate the root, but i remembered someone on boards (thank you whoever you were!) mentioning rSinA to someone else when i was asking about finding the roots to cubics.

hunii07

jumpguy wrote: »

Source for that? It came out as 2x for me.

LilMissCiara wrote: »

No it was supposed to be X. I got it out fine.

firestarter197 wrote: »

no mistake, it comes out as 2x

nommm wrote: »

Same.

firestarter197 wrote: »

you get (2t-2)/t+1 which is 2x. They could have asked it in terms of t, but wanted an extra step I guess.

I got the same as you guys 2x...... I thought the paper over all was awful though,,I'm a repeat LC and my god I've never seen anything like that paper

bren2001

Gumbi wrote: »

I didn't understand that slash First time I've ever seen it.

You didn't need to know what the \ was. The question can be done assuming any valid domain, its based on the derivative. You don't need mathlab or anythin, you observe the derivative and check is it increasing or not a elimate answers from there.

spazzy

IT'S BEEN THE HARDEST PAPER IN YEARS!

BrendaN_f

LilMissCiara wrote: »

Using the solutions I went and corrected myself..! :P

I got 74.6%..!

can i borrow your marking scheme and eidetic memory?

conlufc

for the graphs I guessed A and said B was incorrect cause their going in opposite directions and C was rising when the deravative was negative.
I guessed this with out finishing part (i) of the question so would i still get full marks assuming A is correct?

partyatmygaff

I've just attempted to estimate my marks by comparing the answers I got to Maybe mem (Using reasonably harsh marking estimates). It's not very scientific and it probably won't be very accurate but here is what I may have gotten...

Q1: 38 - Disgusted by part b of this question. A blunder in part c and a slip in part a.
Q2: 35 - The latter part of part b and iii of part c ruined this question for me.
Q3: 32 - Usually my best question. The part Ci ruined this section for me.
Q4: 35 - Part Biii and Biv ruined this question for me
Q5: 50 - Loved this question. Ironically, this was the first time I ever attempted a part five in an exam.
Q6: 42 - Multiple blunders in the last two parts of C IIRC
Q7: 40 - I loved this question. I took off three marks from part B and C not because I made errors in them but because of the fact the marking scheme is likely to be atypical in this question.
Q8: 35 - Extremely disappointed. I'm usually excellent at integration. I made a stupid error in part a and left out a part in Bii.

If my estimations aren't too wildly inaccurate I mightn't actually have done too bad (Largely thanks to differentiation and Q5). Here's hoping.

aranciata

when people say they'll be marked easier, does that mean the attempt marks for questions will be raised from 3 to 6 or 5 to 10 or something like that, or that certain questions ( 7c(ii) ) will have their marks lowered from 15 or 10 to 5?

PseudoFamous

I'm finding it very hard to believe that there are even that many people in the country with an A on that paper, let alone on boards. Not so sure I believe that poll. People going in with solid As in their previous maths exams came out with a kick in the teeth.

Paczini

so I emailed Brendan Guildea and in reply got his private number,
Im gonna call him tomorrow to ask him about that paper

LilMissCiara

BrendaN_f wrote: »

can i borrow your marking scheme and eidetic memory?

Anybody with a simple knowledge of past marking schemes could do it so less of the sarcasm.

I did the exam today, not last year. It wasn't exactly hard to remember what I had done and the answers I had got.

lynchy101

Our supervisor was sound and let us use our books for a while.
We are all really hopeful for an A now.



Stop trolling!! - R.

bren2001

conlufc wrote: »

for the graphs I guessed A and said B was incorrect cause their going in opposite directions and C was rising when the deravative was negative.
I guessed this with out finishing part (i) of the question so would i still get full marks assuming A is correct?

IF you based your guess on the result of part (i) you cannot lose marks on part 2. So yes, you can get full marks for your part (ii), you cannot be docked marks twice.

MikeHough

damn u polka dot.
so u went ahead and made the poll. i was just about to post one when i saw ud made it. was gonna do it all mathsy
sayin:

∞ couldnt be better
∈ of N positive
<0 negative
∈ of C complex
∉ of Q craaaaazy

...feck my procrastination :rolleyes:

polka dot

Trolls have arrived.

BrendaN_f

LilMissCiara wrote: »

Anybody with a simple knowledge of past marking schemes could do it so less of the sarcasm.

I did the exam today, not last year. It wasn't exactly hard to remember what I had done and the answers I had got.

eh, no. do you honestly believe that you managed to accurately predict your score to one decimal place using an unofficial marking scheme with no marks indication, entirely from memory?

bren2001

aranciata wrote: »

when people say they'll be marked easier, does that mean the attempt marks for questions will be raised from 3 to 6 or 5 to 10 or something like that, or that certain questions ( 7c(ii) ) will have their marks lowered from 15 or 10 to 5?

They will allow more answers to be accepted for attempt marks.

The can change a part (b) from 20 marks to 15 and award and extra 5 marks to a different part. This can also be done for (c) but not for (a). (a) will always be 10.

Attempt marks wont be raised, they will always be 2 or 3. The marking scheme has not been made yet, they have to wait on how people do on paper 2.

Daniel S

I made the freeken poll!

polka dot

MikeHough wrote: »

damn u polka dot.
so u went ahead and made the poll. i was just about to post one when i saw ud made it. was gonna do it all mathsy
sayin:

∞ couldnt be better
∈ of N positive
<0 negative
∈ of C complex
∉ of Q craaaaazy

...feck my procrastination :rolleyes:

Oh no, that wasn't me! Someone else (sorry can't remember username!) created a new thread with a poll and one of the mods merged it in.

I love your poll though. Very ... artistic :P

EDIT: it was mtb_kng

nommm

Paczini wrote: »

so I emailed Brendan Guildea and in reply got his private number,
Im gonna call him tomorrow to ask him about that paper

I was talking to his mate George Humphrey. They're both disgusted by it. Apparently there was a few questions even they couldn't quite get their head around!

conlufc

bren2001 wrote: »

IF you based your guess on the result of part (i) you cannot lose marks on part 2. So yes, you can get full marks for your part (ii), you cannot be docked marks twice.

well theres some good news:D...thanks for clarifying.