Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Algorithms, by Jeff Erickson

jeffe.cs.illinois.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 245 posts

Re: Algorithms, by Jeff Erickson

#31

Post by frozenport »

a_bonobo wrote: post #22
yoler wrote: post #9

Isn’t this the guy that is famous for being admitted to a PhD program with an exceptionally low GPA? If so, why is he the exception and why aren’t more PhD programs looking for non-traditional talent? Edit: I read his blog post. It gave me more insight. It looks possible for people with those sort of grades to be admitted even today, but they seem to need a cheerleader on the inside that will help them.

There was a small study that came out recently on biorxiv, with 29 PhD students with GREs all over the place - >GRE scores, while collected at admission, were not used or consulted for admissions decisions and comprise the full range of percentiles from 1% to 91%. We report on the 29 students recruited to the Vanderbilt IMSD from 2007-2011 who have completed the program as of summer 2017. While the data set is not la…

There is another interpretation.

That sadly, grad school has become potlicial and technical appitude doesn't matter. I have accrude a subantial number of high impact publications and can confirm this is the case. On numerous occasions I have been forced to hand over my completed work to facilitate first author publication for visiting scholars or students my Pi liked received co authorship, joint first authorship for no apparent reason.

I would also like to reverse this trend.

Re: Algorithms, by Jeff Erickson

#32

Post by heinrichhartman »

nf05papsjfVbc wrote: post #28
ryanmonroe wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you prefer not to have solutions, pretend you don't have solutions. Having solutions is strictly better (for the reader. I'm ignoring the cost of producing them to begin with)

"pretend you don't have solutions" is not a realistic approach. The strength of people's conviction to this will probably fall on a bell curve and few can resist the temptation when the problems get really tough. Accounting for how humans are, I do not see how one can easily say "Having solutions is strictly better". I can easily think of cases where it is indeed better to have solutions but to say "strictly" require…

yes, exactly.

Re: Algorithms, by Jeff Erickson

#33

Post by slig »

davidgrenier wrote: post #25
yoler wrote: post #9

Isn’t this the guy that is famous for being admitted to a PhD program with an exceptionally low GPA? If so, why is he the exception and why aren’t more PhD programs looking for non-traditional talent? Edit: I read his blog post. It gave me more insight. It looks possible for people with those sort of grades to be admitted even today, but they seem to need a cheerleader on the inside that will help them.

I graduated with a Comp.Sci bachelor with a similar GPA. Spent around 10 years as a programmer in the industry and came back to get into the masters program. I was almost laughed off (a good thing) stating I would have to do another bachelor. Sold my house, got rid of all my stuff and enrolled in pure math bachelor's. Best decision of my life. I though that in my mid 30s with a lot more discipline, being able to work…

Thanks for sharing, really inspiring.

Re: Algorithms, by Jeff Erickson

#34

Post by thrwthrw93223 »

nf05papsjfVbc wrote: post #28
ryanmonroe wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you prefer not to have solutions, pretend you don't have solutions. Having solutions is strictly better (for the reader. I'm ignoring the cost of producing them to begin with)

"pretend you don't have solutions" is not a realistic approach. The strength of people's conviction to this will probably fall on a bell curve and few can resist the temptation when the problems get really tough. Accounting for how humans are, I do not see how one can easily say "Having solutions is strictly better". I can easily think of cases where it is indeed better to have solutions but to say "strictly" require…

Don’t rob the self-learner that doesn’t have access to TAs, fellow students, and professors the ability to check their work, just because someone else doesn’t have the discipline to not abuse it.

Textbook solutions are good for those that aren’t in school, aren’t in formal programs and have no other way of receiving feedback.

The “you should know if you’re right” mentality doesn’t necessarily fit a person that’s been working for 10-years and has been out of the academic mindset. One that is a beginner and could easily fool themselves into thinking they have a correct answer.

It doesn’t allow for correction of false thinking. Anyone can think their proof is correct. But fewer beginners can properly recognize when they are wrong.

This sort of mentality is a bit elitist and gate keeping.

Re: Algorithms, by Jeff Erickson

#36

Post by kurtisc »

heinrichhartman wrote: post #8
_underflow_ wrote: post #3

> Please do not ask me for solutions to the exercises. Even if you are [an] instructor, I will say no. That's kind of a bummer. I like to be able to check my answers when teaching myself things. Am I somehow alone in that?

I have seen many people voice that complain. Personally I rarely had issues verifying a solution once I have worked through a problem. What happens much more frequently, is that I get stuck somewhere, and get tempted to look at a solution if one is provided, which in turn nullifies the achievement. In this sense, not having solutions, makes it easier for me to plough through.

Solutions are to questions as tests are to software. For me they offer peace of mind no matter how sure I am.

Re: Algorithms, by Jeff Erickson

#38

Post by porpoisely »

_underflow_ wrote: post #3

> Please do not ask me for solutions to the exercises. Even if you are [an] instructor, I will say no. That's kind of a bummer. I like to be able to check my answers when teaching myself things. Am I somehow alone in that?

The princeton algorithm site has solutions for some of their exercises. Also they have online lectures as well along with animations, visualizations, etc. It's an excellent resource for those who want to learn algorithms.

https://algs4.cs.princeton.edu/home/

Re: Algorithms, by Jeff Erickson

#40

Post by [deleted] »

nf05papsjfVbc wrote: post #28
ryanmonroe wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you prefer not to have solutions, pretend you don't have solutions. Having solutions is strictly better (for the reader. I'm ignoring the cost of producing them to begin with)

"pretend you don't have solutions" is not a realistic approach. The strength of people's conviction to this will probably fall on a bell curve and few can resist the temptation when the problems get really tough. Accounting for how humans are, I do not see how one can easily say "Having solutions is strictly better". I can easily think of cases where it is indeed better to have solutions but to say "strictly" require…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN