Economics Tripos Part I Paper 3 Past Exam Questions


This document last updated: 27 September 2011.

These pages provide comments on past exam papers for the Economics Tripos Part I Paper 3 (Quantitative Methods in Economics). Where there is no comment for a question, it probably means I've not yet had a go at it, or that it doesn't exist. Make sure you check my corrections page too.

Key:
OK: at least broadly OK
OK(D): Question OK but we've already done it during the year
N/A: No longer on syllabus, as I understand it
OK? or ?: Problem (small or large): you might prefer to avoid this question

Part 1 Paper 3 2003- (covers both maths and statistics)

20032004200520062007
A1OKVery pruned! Bit unclearOKOKOK but ignore the "hence"
A2OKOKOKOKOK
A3OK(D)OK but tediousDull(D)OKOK
A4OKOK(D)OKOKOK (a) not easy
A5OKOKOKOK (Good)OK
A6OKOKOKOKOK
B1OKOK except (a) a bit confusingOK but longOKOK except question should say G = G_bar - tY, not G = G_bar + tY
B2OKOK (relatively easy)Tedious(D)OK (Bit tedious as usual)OK except the very last bit, which is beyond Year1 syllabus
C1OKOKOKOKOK (c) and (d) not easy
C2OK(D)OK (Good)OK (bit tedious)OKOK but time-consuming
C3OK (though (c) a bit puzzling)OK but too long without a spreadsheetOK (though a bit vague in places)(a) not easy (b) OK (Good)
C4OKBit oddOKOK except (d) is too vagueSlightly strange and subjective
C5OKOKStupidly long without a spreadsheetOKOK
C6OKOKOK(a) OK (b) OK (c) Don't see the point
C7(b)?OK
D1OKTedious & (a) and (c) not clearOKOK except tediousDataset rather unrealistic!
D2OKBadly designedOK (though (b) is a bit tedious)Seems far too time-consuming done by handInteresting, though I'm not sure what they wanted for (f)
D3OK(D)OK except (f) not clear
D4(c)?

20082009
A1Hard for section A(a) quite hard (b) horrendous
A2OKOK
A3OK (quick)OK though you don't need to solve the equation!
A4OKWeird and confusing
A5OK
A6OK
B1Seems to have an error in that the determinant (part (b)) could be positive or negativeOK
B2Interesting but long, error-prone and (e) unclear(a)-(c) OK though error-prone; (d) hard
C1OKOK - slightly unusual
C2UnclearOK (Good)
C3OK except (b) ambiguousOK though a bit contrived and long
C4UnclearOK
C5OK (quick)
C6OK
C7
D1OK (quick for section D)OK except too long and not clear if one has to test "assumption" of independence in (c)(i)
D2Long and (d), (e), (f) unclearOK
D3
D4

20102011
A1(b) is badly-wordedOK (Good)
A2OK (fairly easy)Useful though (ii) could be long or short
A3OK (fairly easy)OK (Good)
A4OK (fairly easy)OK - "proportionate" could be clearer
B5OK (very quick for section B)OK but very error-prone
B6OK (very quick for section B)OK though last bit unclear
C7OKOK
C8OKOK
C9OKA bit contrived and confusing
C10OKHum
D11Absurdly long in (a); (b)(v) should say Q2 and Q3Time consuming and confusing
D12OK, though much quicker than D11OK (Good if quick) - much shorter than D11

EQEM (the Maths part of Paper 3 before 2003)

Apr-99 Oct-99 Apr-00 Oct-00 Apr-01 Oct-01 Apr-02
A1 OK OK(D)

OK(D) OK(D) OK(D) OK OK
A2

OK(D) OK OK? OK OK OK
A3 OK(D) OK(D) OK OK OK OK OK
A4 OK OK(D) OK(D) OK OK(D) OK OK
A5

OK(D) OK(D) OK?(D) OK OK OK
A6 OK OK OK(D) OK OK(D) OK(D) OK
A7 OK OK(D) OK(D) OK OK OK OK
A8

OK(D) OK OK(D) OK ? OK
A9 OK OK(D) OK(D) OK OK? OK OK
B10 OK(D) OK

OK(D) OK OK(D) OK? OK
B11

OK(D) ? OK OK OK
B12

OK(D) OK OK OK N/A
B13 OK

OK(D) OK OK? OK OK
B14

OK

OK OK OK
B15

OK(D) (c)? OK OK (c)?

Part 1 Paper 3 1999-2002 (covers only statistics during this period)

1999 2000 2001 2002
A1 OK N/A OK(D) OK
A2 OK OK OK(D) N/A
A3 OK(D) OK(D) OK OK
A4 OK(D) OK(D) OK(D) OK(D)
A5 OK OK(D) OK(D) OK(D)
A6 OK(D) OK(D) OK OK
A7 OK(D) OK ? OK
A8 OK(D) OK(D) OK OK
A9 N/A OK/? ? OK
A10 OK OK/? N/A OK/?
B11 OK(D) N/A N/A N/A
B12 OK(D) N/A OK OK(D)

B13 OK OK(D) OK OK(D)
B14 N/A N/A OK OK
B15 N/A OK ? N/A

Ian Rudy (graphic containing email address for iar1)