Talk:QB/d Bell.partners

First to allow and display discussion of each question, and second, to store the quiz in raw-script for.

1
- The CC-BY-SA license denies the right to modify File:Silhouette Mr Pipo.svg. - It is nearly impossible for Inkscape to modify an svg file. - The paper's author wishes to promote pipe smoking among college students. + The paper's author either likes the pipe or was too busy to remove it.
 * Silhouette Mr Pipo.svg]] Why is the referee smoking a pipe?

The purpose of this question is to inform people about svg files, and Creative Commons. Scalable Vector Graphics (svg) files are the preferred format for images on Wikimedia Commons that are not animated or photographs because they are small and easy to edit. Set education free by adding to this testbank! 

2
- never - While they are discussing strategy (phase 1), but not while their backs are turned to each other. + While their backs are turned, but not while they are discussing strategy (phase 1) - The referee should carefully observe Alice and Bob all the time
 * When is the referee allowed to observe Alice and Bob?

The ref may observe Alice and Bob to make sure they don't communicate ... but the class needs to observer the Mr. Pipo to ensure that he does not collude with the partners to cheat. 

3
- It is cheating and the game should be terminated if the partners are caught doing this - It is cheating, but fortunately the penalty allows partners to do it - It is not cheating, but allowing to partners to do so violates the spirit of the game as a Bell's test experiment simulation. + It is not cheating, and allowing to partners to do this is in the spirit of the game as a Bell's test experiment simulation.
 * is it cheating for one of the partners to change mind in after communication ceases?

We have no idea whether particles change their minds, or any evidence that they have minds that can change. 

4
- Alice and Bob to sometimes give different answers (one "even" while the other "odd") + Alice and Bob to always give different answers (one "even" while the other "odd") - Alice and Bob to always answer "even" - Alice and Bob to always answer "odd" - None of these describes the &beta;-strategy
 * The &beta;-strategy is a new strategy introduced in the couples version of the card game that calls for

Giving different answers only sometimes is not the &beta;-strategy but a combination of &beta; with some other strategy. 

5
- Alice and Bob to sometimes give different answers (one "even" while the other "odd") + Alice and Bob to always give different answers (one "even" while the other "odd") - Alice and Bob to always answer "even" - Alice and Bob to always answer "odd" - None of these describes the &alpha;-strategy
 * The &alpha;-strategy in the couples version of the card game is similar to the strategy introduced in the solitaire version, and calls for

The solitaire game allows the player to play only one even/odd answer for each suit (three answer cards faced up). 

6
- Best for partners: $$+1$$ ... Worst: $$-Q$$ + Best for partners: $$+1$$ ... Worst: $$-3$$ - Best for partners: $$0$$ ... Worst: $$-Q$$ - Best for partners: $$0$$ ... Worst: $$-3$$ - None of these is correct
 * Suppose the referee gives Alice and Bob receive question cards of the different suit (different questions). What are the best and worst possible outcomes for the partners? (Assume for this question that $$Q>3$$)

Alice and Bob will never be penalized for giving different answers to the same question. 

7
- Best for partners: $$+1$$ ... Worst: $$-Q$$ - Best for partners: $$+1$$ ... Worst: $$-3$$ + Best for partners: $$0$$ ... Worst: $$-Q$$ - Best for partners: $$0$$ ... Worst: $$-3$$ - None of these is correct
 * Suppose the referee gives Alice and Bob receive question cards of the same suit (same questions). What are the best and worst possible outcomes for the partners? (Assume for this question that $$Q>3$$)

Mr. Pipo will never catch them giving the same answer to different questions if only the same suits are presented to the partners. 

8
+ Best for partners: $$+1$$ ... Worst: $$-Q$$ - Best for partners: $$+1$$ ... Worst: $$-3$$ - Best for partners: $$0$$ ... Worst: $$-Q$$ - Best for partners: $$0$$ ... Worst: $$-3$$ - None of these is correct
 * Suppose the partners choose the &beta; strategy (which was not available in the solitaire version). What are the best and worst possible outcomes for the partners? (Assume for this question that $$Q>3$$)

They will never lose 3 points for giving the same answer to both questions because one answers "even" to all and the other answers "odd" to all. 

9
+ Best for partners: $$+1$$ ... Worst: $$-Q$$ - Best for partners: $$+1$$ ... Worst: $$-3$$ - Best for partners: $$0$$ ... Worst: $$-Q$$ + Best for partners: $$0$$ ... Worst: $$-3$$ - None of these is correct
 * Suppose both partners choose to answer "even" to any question that is asked.  What are the best and worst possible outcomes for the partners? (Assume for this question that $$Q>3$$)

At least they avoid the penalty. See next question: They might do this if one insists on the &beta; strategy while the other strongly believes that the same question will be asked of both. 

10
- The partners might have cheated so much in the past that they need to lose a round. - One partner might announce that all answers will be "even", while the other is certain that the both question cards will have the same suit. - Both partners agree that there is a 90% chance that the two question cards will have the same suit. + Two of these reasons for this strategy might be valid - There is no reason for the partners to ever adopt this strategy
 * Suppose both partners choose to answer "even" to any question that is asked.  Why would such a strategy ever be adopted? (Assume for this question that $$Q>3$$)

No credit will be given for not noticing that two scenarios are possible for two reasons: (1) it would not be the "best" answer, and (2) this question was made available before the test--you should have studied more if you wanted a better grade. 

11
- win 1 point - lose Q points - no points awarded or lost + lose 3 points
 * How much do the partners win or lose if Alice answers 4&spades; to K&spades; while Bob answers 4 to A?

same answers to different questions 

12
+ win 1 point - lose Q points - no points awarded or lost - lose 3 points
 * How much do the partners win or lose if Alice answers 4&spades; to K&spades; while Bob answers 5 to A?

different answers to different questions 

13
- win 1 point - lose Q points + no points awarded or lost - lose 3 points
 * How much do the partners win or lose if Alice answers 4&spades; to K&spades; while Bob answers 4&spades; to A&spades;?

ref just checking that they are acting as particles by obeying the correlation rule 

14
- win 1 point + lose Q points - no points awarded or lost - lose 3 points
 * How much do the partners win or lose if Alice answers 4&spades; to K&spades; while Bob answers 5&spades; to A&spades;?

the partner may have tried the &beta; strategy and lost (not acting like entangled particles) 

15
- 3 equally probable events: On two they are given different questions, winning twice. On the third event they are given the same answer and lose a point. - 3 equally probable events: On two they are given different questions, winning once and losing once. On the third event they are given the same answer and lose a point. - 3 equally probable events: On two they are given different questions, winning once and losing once. On the third event they are given the same answer and neither gain nor lose a point. - 4 equally probable events: On three they are given different questions, winning once but losing twice. On the fourth event they are given the same answer and lose a point. + 4 equally probable events: On three they are given different questions, winning twice but losing once. On the fourth event they are given the same answer and neither gain nor lose a point.
 * Suppose referee adopts neutral scoring with Q=4 and asks the same question with a probability PS=0.25. This reduces the average loss rate for their partners for the following reason:  Consider a probability space with

Only inquisitive students will want to think about this question. The instructor can easily find out if this question has been randomly selected to be on an upcoming exam. If it does not appear on the test, perhaps don't mention it. If it does appear, begin the class discussion before they see the question in class. Otherwise they will just memorize the answer. Nevertheless this is an important concept: Probability space (with all outcomes equally probable). 

16
+ True - False
 * Although it decreases the rate at which the partners lose point, increasing the probability of asking the same question is more effective at persuading students to act as particles by relying on the &alpha;-strategy because relying on a larger penalty for giving different answers to the same question will tempt students to use the &beta;-strategy only briefly (hoping never to be caught) and then requesting a break to "re-establish" quantum entanglement.

17
+ $$0$$ - $$\infty$$ - $$3$$ - $$4$$ - $$4/3$$
 * Suppose the referee selects neutral scoring with $$Q =\frac{4}{3}\left(\frac{1-P_S}{P_S}\right).$$ What number does the penalty approach as the probability of asking the same question goes to 1?

Good opportunity to discuss limits with students 

18
- $$0$$ + $$\infty$$ - $$3$$ - $$4$$ - $$4/3$$
 * Suppose the referee selects neutral scoring with $$Q =\frac{4}{3}\left(\frac{1-P_S}{P_S}\right).$$ What number does the penalty approach as the probability of asking the same question goes to 0?

discuss limiting cases as above <div style="clear:;">

19
- $$0$$ - $$\infty$$ - $$3$$ + $$4$$ - $$4/3$$
 * Suppose the referee selects neutral scoring with $$Q =\frac{4}{3}\left(\frac{1-P_S}{P_S}\right).$$ What is the penalty if the probability of asking the same question is 0.25?

important case <div style="clear:;">

20
- $$0$$ - $$\infty$$ - $$3$$ - $$4$$ + $$4/3$$
 * Suppose the referee selects neutral scoring with $$Q =\frac{4}{3}\left(\frac{1-P_S}{P_S}\right).$$ What is the penalty if the probability of asking the same question is 0.5?

easy case <div style="clear:;">

Raw script

 * t QB/d_Bell.partners
 * ! q1 CCO (public domain) user:Guy vandegrift
 * ? Silhouette Mr Pipo.svg]] Why is the referee smoking a pipe?
 * - The CC-BY-SA license denies the right to modify File:Silhouette Mr Pipo.svg.
 * - It is nearly impossible for Inkscape to modify an svg file.
 * - The paper's author wishes to promote pipe smoking among college students.
 * + The paper's author either likes the pipe or was too busy to remove it.
 * $ The purpose of this question is to inform people about svg files, and Creative Commons. Scalable Vector Graphics (svg) files are the preferred format for images on Wikimedia Commons that are not animated or photographs because they are small and easy to edit. Set education free by adding to this testbank!


 * ! q2 CCO (public domain) user:Guy vandegrift
 * ? When is the referee allowed to observe Alice and Bob?
 * - never
 * - While they are discussing strategy (phase 1), but not while their backs are turned to each other.
 * + While their backs are turned, but not while they are discussing strategy (phase 1)
 * - The referee should carefully observe Alice and Bob all the time
 * $ The ref may observe Alice and Bob to make sure they don't communicate ... but the class needs to observer the Mr. Pipo to ensure that he does not collude with the partners to cheat.


 * ! q3 CCO (public domain) user:Guy vandegrift
 * ? is it cheating for one of the partners to change mind in after communication ceases?
 * - It is cheating and the game should be terminated if the partners are caught doing this
 * - It is cheating, but fortunately the penalty allows partners to do it
 * - It is not cheating, but allowing to partners to do so violates the spirit of the game as a Bell's test experiment simulation.
 * + It is not cheating, and allowing to partners to do this is in the spirit of the game as a Bell's test experiment simulation.
 * $ We have no idea whether particles change their minds, or any evidence that they have minds that can change.


 * ! q4 CCO (public domain) user:Guy vandegrift
 * ? The &beta;-strategy is a new strategy introduced in the couples version of the card game that calls for
 * - Alice and Bob to sometimes give different answers (one "even" while the other "odd")
 * + Alice and Bob to always give different answers (one "even" while the other "odd")
 * - Alice and Bob to always answer "even"
 * - Alice and Bob to always answer "odd"
 * - None of these describes the &beta;-strategy
 * $ Giving different answers only sometimes is not the &beta;-strategy but a combination of &beta; with some other strategy.


 * ! q5 CCO (public domain) user:Guy vandegrift
 * ? The &alpha;-strategy in the couples version of the card game is similar to the strategy introduced in the solitaire version, and calls for
 * - Alice and Bob to sometimes give different answers (one "even" while the other "odd")
 * + Alice and Bob to always give different answers (one "even" while the other "odd")
 * - Alice and Bob to always answer "even"
 * - Alice and Bob to always answer "odd"
 * - None of these describes the &alpha;-strategy
 * $ The solitaire game allows the player to play only one even/odd answer for each suit (three answer cards faced up).


 * ! q6 CCO (public domain) user:Guy vandegrift
 * ? Suppose the referee gives Alice and Bob receive question cards of the different suit (different questions). What are the best and worst possible outcomes for the partners? (Assume for this question that $$Q>3$$)
 * - Best for partners: $$+1$$ ... Worst: $$-Q$$
 * + Best for partners: $$+1$$ ... Worst: $$-3$$
 * - Best for partners: $$0$$ ... Worst: $$-Q$$
 * - Best for partners: $$0$$ ... Worst: $$-3$$
 * - None of these is correct
 * $ Alice and Bob will never be penalized for giving different answers to the same question.


 * ! q7 CCO (public domain) user:Guy vandegrift
 * ? Suppose the referee gives Alice and Bob receive question cards of the same suit (same questions). What are the best and worst possible outcomes for the partners? (Assume for this question that $$Q>3$$)
 * - Best for partners: $$+1$$ ... Worst: $$-Q$$
 * - Best for partners: $$+1$$ ... Worst: $$-3$$
 * + Best for partners: $$0$$ ... Worst: $$-Q$$
 * - Best for partners: $$0$$ ... Worst: $$-3$$
 * - None of these is correct
 * $ Mr. Pipo will never catch them giving the same answer to different questions if only the same suits are presented to the partners.


 * ! q8 CCO (public domain) user:Guy vandegrift
 * ? Suppose the partners choose the &beta; strategy (which was not available in the solitaire version). What are the best and worst possible outcomes for the partners? (Assume for this question that $$Q>3$$)
 * + Best for partners: $$+1$$ ... Worst: $$-Q$$
 * - Best for partners: $$+1$$ ... Worst: $$-3$$
 * - Best for partners: $$0$$ ... Worst: $$-Q$$
 * - Best for partners: $$0$$ ... Worst: $$-3$$
 * - None of these is correct
 * $ They will never lose 3 points for giving the same answer to both questions because one answers "even" to all and the other answers "odd" to all.


 * ! q9 CCO (public domain) user:Guy vandegrift
 * ? Suppose both partners choose to answer "even" to any question that is asked.  What are the best and worst possible outcomes for the partners? (Assume for this question that $$Q>3$$)
 * + Best for partners: $$+1$$ ... Worst: $$-Q$$
 * - Best for partners: $$+1$$ ... Worst: $$-3$$
 * - Best for partners: $$0$$ ... Worst: $$-Q$$
 * + Best for partners: $$0$$ ... Worst: $$-3$$
 * - None of these is correct
 * $ At least they avoid the penalty. See next question: They might do this if one insists on the &beta; strategy while the other strongly believes that the same question will be asked of both.


 * ! q10 CCO (public domain) user:Guy vandegrift
 * ? Suppose both partners choose to answer "even" to any question that is asked.  Why would such a strategy ever be adopted? (Assume for this question that $$Q>3$$)
 * - The partners might have cheated so much in the past that they need to lose a round.
 * - One partner might announce that all answers will be "even", while the other is certain that the both question cards will have the same suit.
 * - Both partners agree that there is a 90% chance that the two question cards will have the same suit.
 * + Two of these reasons for this strategy might be valid
 * - There is no reason for the partners to ever adopt this strategy
 * $ No credit will be given for not noticing that two scenarios are possible for two reasons: (1) it would not be the "best" answer, and (2) this question was made available before the test--you should have studied more if you wanted a better grade.


 * ! q11 CCO (public domain) user:Guy vandegrift
 * ? How much do the partners win or lose if Alice answers 4&spades; to K&spades; while Bob answers 4 to A?
 * - win 1 point
 * - lose Q points
 * - no points awarded or lost
 * + lose 3 points
 * $ same answers to different questions


 * ! q12 CCO (public domain) user:Guy vandegrift
 * ? How much do the partners win or lose if Alice answers 4&spades; to K&spades; while Bob answers 5 to A?
 * + win 1 point
 * - lose Q points
 * - no points awarded or lost
 * - lose 3 points
 * $ different answers to different questions


 * ! q13 CCO (public domain) user:Guy vandegrift
 * ? How much do the partners win or lose if Alice answers 4&spades; to K&spades; while Bob answers 4&spades; to A&spades;?
 * - win 1 point
 * - lose Q points
 * + no points awarded or lost
 * - lose 3 points
 * $ ref just checking that they are acting as particles by obeying the correlation rule


 * ! q14 CCO (public domain) user:Guy vandegrift
 * ? How much do the partners win or lose if Alice answers 4&spades; to K&spades; while Bob answers 5&spades; to A&spades;?
 * - win 1 point
 * + lose Q points
 * - no points awarded or lost
 * - lose 3 points
 * $ the partner may have tried the &beta; strategy and lost (not acting like entangled particles)


 * ! q15 CCO (public domain) user:Guy vandegrift
 * ? Suppose referee adopts neutral scoring with Q=4 and asks the same question with a probability PS=0.25. This reduces the average loss rate for their partners for the following reason:  Consider a probability space with
 * - 3 equally probable events: On two they are given different questions, winning twice. On the third event they are given the same answer and lose a point.
 * - 3 equally probable events: On two they are given different questions, winning once and losing once. On the third event they are given the same answer and lose a point.
 * - 3 equally probable events: On two they are given different questions, winning once and losing once. On the third event they are given the same answer and neither gain nor lose a point.
 * - 4 equally probable events: On three they are given different questions, winning once but losing twice.  On the fourth event they are given the same answer and lose a point.
 * + 4 equally probable events: On three they are given different questions, winning twice but losing once.  On the fourth event they are given the same answer and neither gain nor lose a point.
 * $ Only inquisitive students will want to think about this question. The instructor can easily find out if this question has been randomly selected to be on an upcoming exam.  If it does not appear on the test, perhaps don't mention it.  If it does appear, begin the class discussion before they see the question in class.  Otherwise they will just memorize the answer.  Nevertheless this is an important concept: Probability space (with all outcomes equally probable).


 * ! q16 CCO (public domain) user:Guy vandegrift
 * ? Although it decreases the rate at which the partners lose point, increasing the probability of asking the same question is more effective at persuading students to act as particles by relying on the &alpha;-strategy because relying on a larger penalty for giving different answers to the same question will tempt students to use the &beta;-strategy only briefly (hoping never to be caught) and then requesting a break to "re-establish" quantum entanglement.
 * + True
 * - False


 * ! q17 CCO (public domain) user:Guy vandegrift
 * ? Suppose the referee selects neutral scoring with $$Q =\frac{4}{3}\left(\frac{1-P_S}{P_S}\right).$$ What number does the penalty approach as the probability of asking the same question goes to 1?
 * + $$0$$
 * - $$\infty$$
 * - $$3$$
 * - $$4$$
 * - $$4/3$$
 * $ Good opportunity to discuss limits with students


 * ! q18 CCO (public domain) user:Guy vandegrift
 * ? Suppose the referee selects neutral scoring with $$Q =\frac{4}{3}\left(\frac{1-P_S}{P_S}\right).$$ What number does the penalty approach as the probability of asking the same question goes to 0?
 * - $$0$$
 * + $$\infty$$
 * - $$3$$
 * - $$4$$
 * - $$4/3$$
 * $ discuss limiting cases as above


 * ! q19 CCO (public domain) user:Guy vandegrift
 * ? Suppose the referee selects neutral scoring with $$Q =\frac{4}{3}\left(\frac{1-P_S}{P_S}\right).$$ What is the penalty if the probability of asking the same question is 0.25?
 * - $$0$$
 * - $$\infty$$
 * - $$3$$
 * + $$4$$
 * - $$4/3$$
 * $ important case


 * ! q20 CCO (public domain) user:Guy vandegrift
 * ? Suppose the referee selects neutral scoring with $$Q =\frac{4}{3}\left(\frac{1-P_S}{P_S}\right).$$ What is the penalty if the probability of asking the same question is 0.5?
 * - $$0$$
 * - $$\infty$$
 * - $$3$$
 * - $$4$$
 * + $$4/3$$
 * $ easy case


 * z

More discussion

 * Archived draft: special:permalink/1878309. Boilerplate: Quizbank/QB/d Conceptual template + talk
 * The clue given after the :$ magic should be short. For longer clues or discussion, use subpages as follows: