If you have a multiple choice test with four answers to choose from for each question and you randomly pick answers, you should get around a 25%. I suppose if you had a multiple choice test where people scored lower than a 25%, that might qualify as "less predictable than random."
Well, wouldn't you have to make sure that everybody doing the test chose at random? In which case, it would make more sense to not have questions and answers, but merely a given number of sets of four choices.
Or am I thinking too much?
soilent brad is PEOPLE!
1 + 2 + 3 + 4 + 5 = EM2C <-- Define it!
"Uh...we don't support the Hannah Montana empire."
- My 6 year old niece
1 + 2 + 3 + 4 + 5 = EM2C <-- Define it!
"Uh...we don't support the Hannah Montana empire."
- My 6 year old niece
My problem with the perception of 'modern classical' music.
- 23/05/2010 08:01:21 PM
792 Views
...
That was a terrible headline which belied the sensibleness of the rest of the article.
- 23/05/2010 11:31:05 PM
486 Views
LoLoLoLoL
- 24/05/2010 06:04:19 AM
475 Views
Though in truth ... I don't hate all atonal music. Every now and then it works.
- 24/05/2010 06:09:04 AM
498 Views
What bothers me, since I know so little about classical music in general, is this line:
- 24/05/2010 12:23:50 AM
705 Views
I think you could have something less predictable than random.
- 24/05/2010 03:19:03 AM
489 Views
Hmm...
- 24/05/2010 05:31:54 AM
500 Views
The static between radio stations is random noise but I wouldn't call it unpredictable
- 24/05/2010 02:41:34 PM
499 Views