Back when I had to enter math answers into a computer, it would count me wrong for sight deviations on a right answer. If I had a random space bar or whatever it was wrong. I can't imagine a computer checking for an answer like this. What the fuck am I even looking at!?
It’s some sort of alternating harmonic series, it looks like Gregory’s series as a base multiplied by sub junk and obfuscated for an undergrad homework problem to me.
Undergrad what though? lol. I don't even know if this is calc, trig, algebra, physics, or just quick maffs. What am I even looking at though?
n/m googled it, but ok, yeah... I'll just stick to saying that stats was hard.
It looks like an alternating series, so It's likely from a physics class involving electrostatic or maybe control systems. It also could be from a later calculus class where you're first introduced to alternating series like Taylor or Leibniz.
As someone who has done this over the years, 2007 version was horrible (as you described), 2015 was normal, 2024 version as you see will literally give you the answer and tell you try again without even a point penalty.
Considering the complexity of the correct answer, I wonder how many people actually got that correct.
Not only correct, but also entered in the right syntax and form with correct derivative nuance for the slight possibility of Pearson's mymathlab to maybe not tell you to go fuck yourself.
Pearson's must have one hell of a contract with educators cause that shit hasn't improved at all in 20 years. One prof we had for multiple courses rallied against it. They eventually gave up and just carried over the grades to the gradebook. It's remarkable how quickly teaching in academia can knock a person down.
Honestly it depends on what the question was. For instance if the question was "write this integral in the form of a sum" it might not be so bad
There are still a lot of rather arbitrary decisions to make.
Is 4/pi inside or outside of the summation?
Is it (-1)^n+1 or (-1)^n with an additional negative sign in any of the other natural locations for it.
Is the e term outside of the fraction with a negative exponent, or part of the denominator.
Do you start with n=0 or n=1 (and adjust the terms inside the summation accordingly)
Did they expand (2n+1)^2?
I guess I should feel stupid for not understanding this but I feel happy I don't care about it. :)
You know you are in some deep shit when the answer for a math question is no longer just numbers
