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

101–110 of 162 posts

Re: Algorithms by Jeff Erickson

#101

Post by cpsempek »

Love the style already. Here's a footnote from Chapter 1, and a reason while I'll continue to (very leisurely) read this book.

> When I was an undergraduate, I attributed recursion to “elves” instead of the Recursion Fairy, referring to the Brothers Grimm story about an old shoemaker who leaves his work unfinished when he goes to bed, only to discover upon waking that elves (“Wichtelmänner”) have finished everything overnight. Someone more entheogenically experienced than I might recognize these Rekursionswichtelmänner as Terence McKenna’s “self-transforming machine elves”.

Re: Algorithms by Jeff Erickson

#102

Post by tmotwu »

skrtskrt wrote: post #100
unishark wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Instead textbook writers seem to have this adversarial approach against readers, thinking they’ll “cheat themselves” if they look up solutions or attempt to verify their work. I agree that worked problems make a text much more valuable and useful; even students in a class may spend a lot of time doing self-study. And for self-study, without worked problems the book is only useful as a reference while working proble…

In college, cheating on the homeworks was quite literally the only way to get all the work for 4 engineering classes done on time. We still learned it all for exams, and received our exam grades accordingly, which are generally >60% of the full grade for the class. But we were putting in 80+ hours a week on engineering classes and it simply wasn't enough for the obscene amount of work professors assigned. Students cr…

Unless you were planning to graduate in 3 years or less, I've personally never seen anyone experience this.

Advisors should have worked with you to make sure your semester workload floats at around 40-50 hours a week, 60 hours at most during a bad semester. Some people actually care about retaining the material they're learning - taking 4 engineering classes a semester is a waste of time and likely detrimental to learning. It's usually 2-3 engineering classes plus a few easy blow off classes a semester to get all done in 4 years.

Re: Algorithms by Jeff Erickson

#103

Post by maxtollenaar »

Can't find the exact policy reference, but I remember that if you don't understand Jeff's problems(in HW or exams), you could write "I don't know" and get 25% of the grades for the problems

not exact reference towards the policy: "In the table below, green scores are above 95% and red scores are below 25% (equivalent to "I don't know" on every page); those outliers were excluded when computing statistics and cutoffs." - https://courses.engr.illinois.edu/cs473/fa2012/

Re: Algorithms by Jeff Erickson

#104

Post by chasd00 »

skrtskrt wrote: post #100
unishark wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Instead textbook writers seem to have this adversarial approach against readers, thinking they’ll “cheat themselves” if they look up solutions or attempt to verify their work. I agree that worked problems make a text much more valuable and useful; even students in a class may spend a lot of time doing self-study. And for self-study, without worked problems the book is only useful as a reference while working proble…

In college, cheating on the homeworks was quite literally the only way to get all the work for 4 engineering classes done on time. We still learned it all for exams, and received our exam grades accordingly, which are generally >60% of the full grade for the class. But we were putting in 80+ hours a week on engineering classes and it simply wasn't enough for the obscene amount of work professors assigned. Students cr…

I remember two breakdowns while going through Computer Science and Engineering at UTA ( far from a top-tier school, we liked to call it "UT Almost" ) in the late 90s

1. a student in physics broke down sobbing during the final, like uncontrolled wailing. The TA helped her get up and walk out

2. in the discreet structures course a student got up, walked to the front of the room in tears, tore up their final in front of the class and prof, and then walked out.

3. not sure if it counts but in that same physics class from #1 another student threw up all over themselves but sat there in it and finished the final. maybe just sick idk

a lot of students are hotshit in HS and then get to college and find out they're not as smart as they thought. heh i came from rural TX armed with Algebra II and didn't even own a computer. Fortunately for me, i somehow ended up with a handful of upper classmen friends who seemed to make it a mission that i get through it. I owe them so much.

EDIT: Professionally, i've been on plenty of conference calls where peers break down in tears. There's only so much pressure a person can bear before nerves just give way.

Re: Algorithms by Jeff Erickson

#105

Post by dehrmann »

tinmandespot wrote: post #6
jason2323 wrote: post #3

In my experience these actually didn’t do a great job of explaining things like dynamic programming. I prefer Kleinberg and Tardos

I had the opposite experience, though I agree that YMMV. I return to the chapter on Dynamic Programming every time I need to prepare for an interview.

I don't think I've ever been asked a DP problem in an interview, and only had to use it while programming once. That said, I liked the MIT lecture on it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OQ5jsbhAv_M

Re: Algorithms by Jeff Erickson

#106

Post by unishark »

musingsole wrote: post #71
unishark wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Instead textbook writers seem to have this adversarial approach against readers, thinking they’ll “cheat themselves” if they look up solutions or attempt to verify their work. I agree that worked problems make a text much more valuable and useful; even students in a class may spend a lot of time doing self-study. And for self-study, without worked problems the book is only useful as a reference while working proble…

> If you give homework that takes multiple hours each week I think I found the problem. Educators have such an obsession with homework and stealing more class time from their students they can't imagine different models where having the answers in front of you doesn't detract from learning. Have you never used flash cards? My answers are on the back and yet...

I don't know what you mean by stealing. In college you are generally supposed to devote twice as many hours outside of class as in class. It's probably stated in your student handbook. That is why 12 to 16 credit hours is called "full time". In a problem-solving discipline the best way to spend that study time is solving problems. As a bonus you can get personalized feedback when it is graded.

Re: Algorithms by Jeff Erickson

#107

Post by musingsole »

unishark wrote: post #106
musingsole wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you give homework that takes multiple hours each week I think I found the problem. Educators have such an obsession with homework and stealing more class time from their students they can't imagine different models where having the answers in front of you doesn't detract from learning. Have you never used flash cards? My answers are on the back and yet...

I don't know what you mean by stealing. In college you are generally supposed to devote twice as many hours outside of class as in class. It's probably stated in your student handbook. That is why 12 to 16 credit hours is called "full time". In a problem-solving discipline the best way to spend that study time is solving problems. As a bonus you can get personalized feedback when it is graded.

I'm going to call that stockholm syndrome. Many people throw around the idea of spend twice as much time in class as out. That's a fine idea for some, but many don't need it. Forcing a student to fill out problems to satisfy the instructor's concept of enough time spent is completely tangential to purpose of an education.

There isn't a requirement for the amount of time a MMA fighter spends in the gym. They set their own schedules and reap the results.

Re: Algorithms by Jeff Erickson

#108

Post by victor106 »

dkfjs wrote: post #49

Not proving solutions to textbooks seems to be a common theme in mathematics and theoretical computer science. It makes it difficult for those outside of the traditional classroom to learn the material. Instead textbook writers seem to have this adversarial approach against readers, thinking they’ll “cheat themselves” if they look up solutions or attempt to verify their work. Experts make mistakes, beginners would pr…

I agree with this 100%.

It’s really hard for everyone when there are no solutions provided. Even if you arrive at the correct answer it’s nice to know how the author is thinking about the problem

Re: Algorithms by Jeff Erickson

#109

Post by ycombobreaker »

musingsole wrote: post #107
unishark wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know what you mean by stealing. In college you are generally supposed to devote twice as many hours outside of class as in class. It's probably stated in your student handbook. That is why 12 to 16 credit hours is called "full time". In a problem-solving discipline the best way to spend that study time is solving problems. As a bonus you can get personalized feedback when it is graded.

I'm going to call that stockholm syndrome. Many people throw around the idea of spend twice as much time in class as out. That's a fine idea for some, but many don't need it. Forcing a student to fill out problems to satisfy the instructor's concept of enough time spent is completely tangential to purpose of an education. There isn't a requirement for the amount of time a MMA fighter spends in the gym. They set their…

How is that a stockholm syndrome? Classroom hours are set low enough specifically because of the expectation of out-of-classroom work/study. The courses could meet for longer and expect all work to be done in class, but that is incredibly restrictive for planning schedules.

Re: Algorithms by Jeff Erickson

#110

Post by ycombobreaker »

mindcrime wrote: post #81
bloodorange wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The author of this particular book made his choice based on his experience teaching the course. While, of course no one can stop you from criticising his choice, on any day, I'd respect his opinion more than that of an angry internet commenter as he (the author of the book) has more invested in it _and_ has given free resource to the community after putting a lot of work into it.

I mostly agree with your sentiment. But I don't necessarily see it as a question of respecting one opinion more than the other. The author of the book didn't make a statement like "books without solutions are universally" better or anything. But he did make it clear that he optimized for one particular audience (his students at Illinois) over another possible audience (self-learners). And on that, he totally has the…

> If one doesn't find this book useful, they're under no obligation to use it. And the author isn't likely to change his position based on a few grouchy Internet commentators.

Yes this is what I don't understand. Why are there so many critical posts about this particular decision? Why didn't those users just close their browser tab and move on with life? They are bring offered a free resource, it doesn't meet their needs/desires, they choose to complain. It seems very rude to me. The few who have suggested alternatives are contributing.

Post reply on HN