"Mahit Gupta" <23*9*2*
5@s*u*e*t*u*a*e*u*a*> wrote:
> If we tried making an implementation for our agent with an algorithm we know is superior but we fail to do so and go back to a more naive but working algorithm, how will we explain this in our report.
>
> My question is how will I convince that my strategy is better than other strategies when I know its not but I wasn't able to implement the better one for this project.
>
> Should I just compare all of them and be honest that although a better strategy exist, I wasn't able to implement it, following up on that, I could give a snapshot of what I tried implementing if needed.
Just be honest. You investigated that idea, but were not able to get it working. So you are unable to evaluate it, but you suspect it would perform better if you had been able to implement it. That's fine.
Your report should be evidence of your problem solving and "scientific" process. It does not need to make you out to be some genius that found the optimal solution immediately. This is an open ended problem, and you were all expected to investigate this problem, so evidence of that investigation is fine! Negative results (trying something and it working poorly, or not working) are fine!
Briefly: Just prove to me that you used your brain.
Cheers,
Gozz