I have participated in three formal mathematical modeling competitions: the national second prize in 20 12, the first prize in 20 13 (M prize) and the special prize in 20 14 (O prize). My paper was published in the official magazine UMAP as the only paper on question B.

In fact, I didn't do any training in mathematical modeling competition between 13 and 14, so my strength should not be improved. However, because I won an O prize at the Universiade, I suddenly changed from an unknown little role to a so-called "digital model god" invited by many people to share their experiences. I am also very emotional.

I was shocked when I participated in the mathematical modeling competition and looked at the winning papers. All kinds of obscure formulas, all kinds of tall nouns, I also felt that only a real master could write such a paper. Later, after some experience, I found that the threshold for writing such a paper was not high.

Although the mathematical modeling competition involves a wide range of knowledge, its depth is indeed limited. So many times, you can get a good prize by assembling several models you don't know, writing a paper and packaging them with some tips.

In this process, you do come into contact with a new mathematical model, but your understanding of it is too shallow; You did write some programs, but you may call the toolbox and existing functions more, and you wrote some simple logic or drawing programs yourself.

Privately, the core of mathematical modeling should be to establish and solve the model; However, in the mathematical model competition, packaging seems to be more important than the two. An awesome author of mathematical model papers can pull out very simple and low things, which seem to be very high, but the competition results are better than those who really have dry goods but the papers are not well written.