Mathematics Analysis and Approaches (AA) Extended Essay Exemplar:… | RevisionDojo

Loading document preview...

IB Mathematics Analysis and Approaches (AA) SL Extended Essay Example

¿En qué medida pueden los principios de teoría de decisiones, análisis bayesiano y teoría de juegos optimizar matemáticamente las estrategias de apuesta en escenarios de flush draw (proyecto de color) en Texas Hold'em bajo condiciones de información incompleta?SL

Official IB Result

IB Grade: B

Criteria A: Focus and Method

4/6

Criteria Strands

A.1Topic communication and explanation

Good

A.2Research question clarity and focus

Good

A.3Research methodology

Moderate

Criteria Feedback

You communicated a recognizably mathematical investigation with a clear poker context.
You stated the research question prominently and returned to it in the conclusion.
You narrowed the investigation to a heads-up, post-flop flush-draw scenario, which improves manageability.

The overall question is still too broad for the depth actually achieved.
Some terminology, symbols, and equations are imprecise or corrupted.
The method is described more ambitiously than it is carried through in the later analysis.

Criteria B: Knowledge and Understanding

4/6

Criteria Strands

B.1Subject knowledge application

Moderate

B.2Use of terminology and concepts

Moderate

Criteria Feedback

You show solid knowledge of poker probability and related concepts such as outs, pot odds, expected value, and conditional probability.
You use a range of subject-specific terminology that is mostly relevant to the investigation.
Your core flush-draw probability work is accessible and generally sound.

Several definitions and symbols are not stated cleanly enough for full mathematical precision.
Some later formulae and numerical examples are inconsistent with earlier definitions.
You sometimes treat draw-completion probability as if it were the same as total equity.

Criteria C: Critical Thinking

9/12

Criteria Strands

C.1Research quality

Poor

C.2Analysis depth

Poor

C.3Discussion and evaluation

Moderate

Criteria Feedback

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua.
Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat.

Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur.
Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum.

Criteria D: Presentation

4/4

Criteria Strands

D.1Structure appropriateness

Excellent

D.2Layout and formatting

Moderate

Criteria Feedback

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua.
Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat.

Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur.
Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum.

Loading scores...

Official IB Result

IB Grade: B

Criteria A: Focus and Method

4/6

Criteria Strands

A.1Topic communication and explanation

Good

A.2Research question clarity and focus

Good

A.3Research methodology

Moderate

Criteria Feedback

You communicated a recognizably mathematical investigation with a clear poker context.
You stated the research question prominently and returned to it in the conclusion.
You narrowed the investigation to a heads-up, post-flop flush-draw scenario, which improves manageability.

The overall question is still too broad for the depth actually achieved.
Some terminology, symbols, and equations are imprecise or corrupted.
The method is described more ambitiously than it is carried through in the later analysis.

Criteria B: Knowledge and Understanding

4/6

Criteria Strands

B.1Subject knowledge application

Moderate

B.2Use of terminology and concepts

Moderate

Criteria Feedback

You show solid knowledge of poker probability and related concepts such as outs, pot odds, expected value, and conditional probability.
You use a range of subject-specific terminology that is mostly relevant to the investigation.
Your core flush-draw probability work is accessible and generally sound.

Several definitions and symbols are not stated cleanly enough for full mathematical precision.
Some later formulae and numerical examples are inconsistent with earlier definitions.
You sometimes treat draw-completion probability as if it were the same as total equity.

Criteria C: Critical Thinking

9/12

Criteria Strands

C.1Research quality

Poor

C.2Analysis depth

Poor

C.3Discussion and evaluation

Moderate

Criteria Feedback

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua.
Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat.

Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur.
Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum.

Criteria D: Presentation

4/4

Criteria Strands

D.1Structure appropriateness

Excellent

D.2Layout and formatting

Moderate

Criteria Feedback

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua.
Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat.

Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur.
Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum.