Of the dozens of people who have taken the KAMIKAZE, there were 8 who self-reported math SAT scores. These were:
The correlation between KAMIKAZE scores and the SAT derived math IQs was a moderate 0.39 which isn’t terrible considering how restricted the range of ability is. Even the lowest scoring person in the sample (Loaded?) scored in the genius range.
When I placed KAMIKAZE scores and math IQs in rank order, I got the following equivalencies:
Using this same sample of 8, I arranged the items in order of difficulty based on how many of them passed each one.
Pumpkin Person 
Below 140 isn’t genius range lol
In any case, I scored 12 on this test when I took it according to the time limit and 720 (along with 800 verbal) on the math section of an SAT from the early 2000s, I think May 2002. I solved a few more, including the microbe one, later. I also know someone else who solved 15 under the time limit, but I don’t know their SAT Math score, if any, although I do know they scored perfect or close to it on ACT Math.
you scored 11
Though your score was reported to you as 12. This was because there was briefly an error where one of the research questions was adding a point.
I scored 12 when I took the test originally, by kiwi’s answers. I took the test through the website to provide additional data, and if I didn’t score 12 again, then one of the following situations must apply:
1. I accidentally entered an answer incorrectly
2. The website’s scoring key contains a mistake
3. The original scoring key I got in the e-mail contains a mistake
4. I scored myself incorrectly (not possible since I repeatedly checked all my answers against the key provided in the e-mail)
Yes you incorrectly answered “3” as probability of getting even number in the second item that appeared on the test. I assume that was a typo.
In any case, you can use my score pair of 12 on KAMIKAZE and 720 on early 2000s SAT math, or whatever 720 converts to on this older SAT
Thanks!
If retarded is 30 points below average, genius should be 30 points above.
So borderline genius is 115 huh? I guess six-foot people are borderline potential NBA stars?
Anything under IQ 80 is borderline retarded so anything above 120 is borderline genius.
I have to say I’m a little surprised that someone in the top 1% of the sat math scale only managed 3 on this test. Did they make typos in their responses or get caught by the test not accepting decimals without a 0 in front?
Anyway, I look forward to seeing norms based on more data points, and I would really appreciate it if you sent me the excel file of individual responses.
He’s in the top 2% on the math SAT and his score should be considered 4 because of the decimal issue which has now been fixed. I’ll look into the excel thing.
Define genius
Well retardation is defined as:
According to DSM-IV criteria,7 an individual is diagnosed with mental retardation if they have significantly below average intellectual functioning, as defined by an intelligence quotient (IQ; measured using a standardized, individually administer/red intelligence test) at or below 70. In addition, limitations in adaptive functioning (i.e., effective coping of common life demands) are present in at least two of the following skill areas: communication, home living, self-care, self-direction, use of community resources, functional academic skills, social/interpersonal skills, work, leisure, health, and safety. Finally, onset must occur before age 18 years. The DSM-IV classifies mental retardation into four stages based on severity: mild (IQ score of 50-55 to approximately 70), moderate (IQ score of 30-35 to 50-55), severe (IQ score of 20-25 to 35-40), and profound (IQ score of less than 20-25).
So let’s define genius as just the opposite of that:
According to pumpkin person, an individual is diagnosed with genius if they have significantly above average intellectual functioning, as defined by an intelligence quotient (IQ; measured using a standardized, individually administer/red intelligence test) at or above 130. In addition, outstanding success in adaptive functioning (i.e., effective coping of common life demands) are present in at least two of the following skill areas: communication, home living, self-care, self-direction, use of community resources, functional academic skills, social/interpersonal skills, work, leisure, health, and safety. Finally, onset must occur before age 18 years. Pumpkin Person classifies genius into four stages based on severity: mild (IQ score of 150-145 to approximately 130), moderate (IQ score of 170-165 to 150-145), severe (IQ score of 180-175 to 165-160), and profound (IQ score of above 180 – 175).
I like the definition, but I’d call it giftedness or something, rather than genius. Calling it genius inflates the term
Ganzir is mentally retarded he has autism. He admitted it himself.
Autistics are some of the most creative and brilliant people in the World. The World’s most successful man (Elon Musk) is autistic.
Autism means you have no creativity puppy and musk has never been diagnosed by a professional and doesn’t appear autistic.
“Autism means you have no creativity”
The World’s leading autism expert disagrees:
In The Pattern Seekers, Cambridge University psychologist Simon Baron-Cohen makes a case that autism is as crucial to our creative and cultural history as the mastery of fire. Indeed, Baron-Cohen argues that autistic people have played a key role in human progress for seventy thousand years, from the first tools to the digital revolution.
https://www.goodreads.com/en/book/show/50358526-the-pattern-seekers
He means it in a different context like making tools and analysing math problems. Not the way the common person would view creativity.
he means it in the most important context of all: creating technology & advancing science.
pepe, you might not agree with the paradigm about genius presented in these, but I do, and I think they’re worth your reading time:
https://paulcooijmans.com/genius/genius.html
https://paulcooijmans.com/genius/associative_horizon.html
https://paulcooijmans.com/genius/conscientiousness.html
https://paulcooijmans.com/genius/synergy.html
https://paulcooijmans.com/genius/rar_disc_genius.html
a racially homogeneous society still sucks if there is language and religion diversity. or if it’s just really big geographically.
iceland also has an almost 100% rate of unionization.
germany should never have unified. it’s been an enormous disaster for the whole world..
the basque and the catalonians should be independent.
france should be split into at least three pieces.
italy into at least 2.
the US into at least 5.
china and india into a lot more than that.
I think language and religious differences can be overcome but its very tough. Ideally you would start off with a blank slate like Iceland or Denmark.
So I scored an 8 on the TAVIS and a 5 on this that is about a 20 point discrepancy. My math IQ can’t be that high. I’ve never been able to understand the mathematical relationships, but I sure as shit can solve them fast if I know how to do them.
I tried pumpkin. but I quit after the third question. I have borderline working memory.
I think I have an overactive amygdala. I am taking medications for generalized anxiety disorder.
Probably made it further than pill. He likely quit half way through question 1.
Most times this would not be a problem for me but my energy just vanished. I need a different set of drugs than what they are giving me.
Inability to self regulate tampers with IQ
I don’t get the Math IQ bit. a 720 on the post-2016 SAT-M is only 93rd-95th percentile, so I don’t see how it corresponds to 140 Math IQ.
Ah no wonder by norms look so weird. I was converting to the pre-1995 math scale and then using 1980s norms. But perhaps people are way better at math since the 1980s so I need a different method. Either that or the college board’s equivalency tables are meaningless.
New norming coming soon…
730 was on my third attempt 510 was my first score. if i had scored 4 its because i lack conscientiousness!
i cant seem to have the mental endurance to do math problems nor do i have the motivation too if that makes sense to yall.
these SAT-IQ conversions don’t seem very accurate.
640 MATH-SAT(1995 to 2016 scale) is around the 80-85 percentile ,even assuming only the smartest 1/3 took the SAT, there is no way 640 represents more than 125 iq(u.s norms).
Can you please tell me what is the probability of having a mom who’s IQ is 150 and a dad’s whos IQ is 160?
So basically puppy autism destroys your ability to be human. It makes you a robot.
Dude, you’re a middle aged unemployed man who lives in his mom’s basement & hasn’t showered in a month and a half. Who the hell are you to call people subhuman?
Well I have a very valid excuse for where I am with my mental health difficulties.
i have bipolar myself. i dont think there are excuses to be made if youre going to be a malignant douchebag to others with the same problems as you!
its called being a hypocrite look it up.
Using the data you sent me, I came up with the following tentative norm based on similar assumptions and methodology to your first norm of the TAVIS:
Score: KAMIKAZE IQ equivalent
1: 160
I also generated this one just by setting the mean of the sample to 130 and the standard deviation to 15:
1 101
2 106
3 110
4 115
5 120
6 124
7 129
8 133
9 138
10 142
11 147
12 152
13 156
14 161
15 165
16 170
17 174
Interesting. The only problem is there were tons of 0 or 1 scores (probably from people retaking the test to test if certain answers were correct) which may have skewed the mean and SD
I deleted all submissions that had 0 scores, spent less than 10 minutes, or were from the same IP address. That left me with only valid 36 submissions, which is what I based this norm on. Excluding submissions that spent less than 10 minutes probably excluded a lot of low ability scorers, but I wanted to be sure that all submissions were from people who gave the test a serious attempt.
Sounds pretty good, assuming the raw scores have a linear relationship with IQ. I don’t like the excluding of people who spent less than 10 minutes though, because most of them probably would have scored the same had they spent the full 35 minutes.
there was only one score of 1 left after this filtering process, all others were 3 or higher
If I had just used the raw data, the mean and sd would have been 4.4 and 4.3 rather than 7.3 and 2.8 on the filtered data – so the filtering process had a very significant effect.
the score of 4 i received would be accurate as i assess my quant and full-scale IQ to be 115!
wow great job!
Yeah, the other norm I tried to post was based on taking the top and bottom percentile ranks for a certain score and then converting them to IQ, averaging them, and adding 30. It was fairly similar looking to the norm above, but differed a bit at the extremes (a score of 15 was 160, a score of 3 was 107). Of course the raw scores probably don’t have a linear relationship with IQ, but with so little data it’s not like we have much of a chance at being super accurate anyway.
also if you reduce the time spent requirement to one minute instead of ten barely changes anything, the mean is still 7.3 and the sd becomes 3.4 instead of 3.3 (not sure why I said it was 2.7 before).
If you post the number of people who has scored each puntuation would give a better idea of the distribution
if it aint foreign than its borin amirite?
1: 1 person
2: 0 people
3: 5 people
4: 3 people
5: 4 people
6: 4 people
7: 4 people
8: 7 people
9: 2 people
10: 2 people
11: 1 person
12: 4 people
13-14: 0 people
15: 2 people
16-17: 0 people
The total is 39 people, so the percentiles for each score are:
1: 0-3%ile
2: 3%ile
3: 3-15%ile
4: 15-23%ile
5: 23-33%ile
6: 33-44%ile
7: 44-54%ile
8: 54-72%ile
9: 72-77%ile
10: 77-82%ile
11: 82-85%ile
12: 85-95%ile
13-14: 95%ile
15: 95-100%ile
16-17: 100%ile
nice
did you count my score as 12? pepe said it got reduced to 11
it got reduced to 11 by a typo you made but then got increased back to 12 by an error in the scoring system that briefly occurred on the day you took it, so he counted you as 12.
Actually in the norm I did based on the 36 submission that met the requirements I posted above, your score was excluded since you only took about 2 minutes on the test. But the distribution I posted above includes your score.
I hadn’t notice that 0 is treated as a plural in English before reading Kiwianon list.
I ll have to try this test.
The first norm didn’t post properly, don’t know why. Here it is:
1: 160
1 raw on the KAMIKAZE is IQ 160 ??
yeah I was puzzled by that too. Maybe so smart they don’t take the test? LMAO.
something wrong with the commenting system
Pill is a fool! he doesnt comprehend much yet makes bold assumptions.
Peeps, why don’t you write a book on Oprah?
You love thinking, talking, writing about her. Plus it is big money.
he could write an anthology on his insights he has gained from studying the life of Oprah over the years he has spent!
it would be very good for Pumpkin to be a bit unbiased when approaching his audience but nothing too embellished from the truth of what he perceives of Oprah!
Would it be possible to do a combined score for the TAVIS and the KAMIKAZE?
Yes.. And there’s probably enough data on people who have taken both to do a norming of the composite
I got 7 on Tavis and 8 on this. My spatial is completely retarded and math is borderline retarded.
What makes you say that?
Pumpkinperson, can you please tell me what would someone with an iq of 120 be considered?
Very smart? Smart?
And, with an iq of 110, 130, 140, 150, 160? Like what would you categorize them in terms of smartness?
whoever wrote this comment mustnt be very smart. stop asking stupid questions.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-11235473/Anglo-Saxons-24-English-study-reveals.html
Mug are you aware of this?
hell hath no fury like a woman scorned.
i am aware of that!