Angle Ranking - Antialiased?

[multiades]

Advertisement - Members don't see this ad

Anyone who has taken the DAT... do they antialias the lines for the angles, or are they straight black-and-white pixelated? Also, are test centers using LCD monitors these days?

Thanks!

 

[multiades]

Nobody? Surely someone noticed this when taking it...

Are the angles jagged like the line on the left, or smoothed like the line on the right?

 

[Bereno]

If memory serves me correctly, I think I remember them not being anti-aliased... They were on LCD when I took it.

 

[ushaseos]

Not anti aliased, screen resolution is low and its on LCD displays which are in 4:3 aspect ratio. It doesn't look pretty, but honestly, you can't spend enough time getting close to the screen for each question and looking at the gradation.

Main strategy for angles is go through fast, spend as little time and use logical deduction to eliminate choices.

 

[multiades]

Right. I never thought counting pixels would help, but I would like to use realistic practice. From what I can tell, very small angles with different orientations and leg lengths are almost impossible to differentiate reliably anyway, and these questions will end up being a test of reasoning/elimination skill.

Thanks!

 

[Bereno]

Right. I never thought counting pixels would help, but I would like to use realistic practice. From what I can tell, very small angles with different orientations and leg lengths are almost impossible to differentiate reliably anyway, and these questions will end up being a test of reasoning/elimination skill.

Thanks!

you won't have time to count pixels lol

 

[ushaseos]

Yeah, the 2-3 degree difference angles are objectively difficult to differentiate between especially when in different orientations and with short legs vs. long. Use the rapid eye technique if you're familiar with it but even that is just a trick and it doesn't work with 100% accuracy (not to criticize the guy who came up with it though). Short answer is that there is no 100% foolproof way to do angle comparisons. They suck and with practice you'll be able to get most of them right. You can't hope for much more.

 

[Bereno]

Yeah, the 2-3 degree difference angles are objectively difficult to differentiate between especially when in different orientations and with short legs vs. long. Use the rapid eye technique if you're familiar with it but even that is just a trick and it doesn't work with 100% accuracy (not to criticize the guy who came up with it though). Short answer is that there is no 100% foolproof way to do angle comparisons. They suck and with practice you'll be able to get most of them right. You can't hope for much more.

👍

 

[adentistsomeday]

You won't have time to compare the pixels, I tried to for a few, but noticed I was taking way too much time on them. Don't get me wrong, it really does work but you have to save your time for the sure-thing questions like the cube counting.

Sent from my Transformer Prime TF201 using Tapatalk

 

[r4nb]

For the angles section, it took me a while to develop a way of differentiating which angle was bigger than the other, but if you look closely and compare the vertex of two figures, it helps to spot which is bigger than the other. If that doesn't work, you can also try to compare each given angle to 90 degrees and deduce in that manner which is bigger. If I remember correctly though, the angle portion of the PAT on the actual DAT was much easier than the ones in CDP.

 

[ushaseos]

For the angles section, it took me a while to develop a way of differentiating which angle was bigger than the other, but if you look closely and compare the vertex of two figures, it helps to spot which is bigger than the other. If that doesn't work, you can also try to compare each given angle to 90 degrees and deduce in that manner which is bigger. If I remember correctly though, the angle portion of the PAT on the actual DAT was much easier than the ones in CDP.

Absolutely true. The CDP angles are pure evil. Even Achiever's angles were easier than CDP.