Author: Miguel A. Ballicora
Date: 11:29:41 08/20/02
Go up one level in this thread
On August 20, 2002 at 11:42:55, Sune Fischer wrote: >On August 20, 2002 at 11:24:52, Gian-Carlo Pascutto wrote: >>>*) The fact that it is readable to the average laymen is not a requirement of a >>>thesis. >> >>But increases it's value greatly. > >Unfortunately it is completely impossible in most areas, who other than science >students would know what a Hessian matrix is, or how to solve a differential >equation. I couldn't write my thesis without it, so I expect it not to be a >formal requirement of any kind. > >>>And I find it very insulting to give a masters degree on the basis of such >junk, some of us actually work hard for that degree you know. >> >>This is very common. A Masters was awarded to Andy Van De Putte >>by the RUG, for Mat(h). It was a Java chess program that did not contain >>any new idea (contrary to 'blik'), and was weak and buggy. The promotor >>(Veerle Fack) did not understand even the very basics of alphabeta. >> >>Compared to this, Marcel is a genius. The level in most computer science >>departments that deal with AI is of a completely laughable level. >> >>I don't like this situation either. I did physics. Most of the computer >>chess papers would have provoked a 'is this a joke' question from my >>professors. Yet, all those people are getting masters degrees. > >I realize there are different standards across the scientific branches, but I >see no original contribution from the author in this case. >If this *is* the standard for computer science, or whatever the masters was in, >then I need to apologize, but I would be very disappointed if that was the case. This is a thesis for a Masters Degree, _NOT_ a PhD. Do not forget that. In many areas, original contributions are not required to graduate (Business). Moreover, in many areas you do not even need a thesis, you can replace them with more courses. In other areas of hard sciences you need some novel contribution; however, standards in different countries are not the same at this level. At the PhD level, standards are a little bit closer. I do not think that lack of novel contribution is a reason for an attack (I haven't read it yet, but I think I will). Regards, Miguel > >>I find it amazing that you are attacking Marcel, when his work wasn't >>really that bad. I *wish* there were more 'bad' publications like this. > >There is nothing wrong with the paper as such, it reminds me of Bruce's tutorial >which I like more than most official papers, but to give a masters for it I >actually find offensive. It degrads my masters (when I get it) in some way. > >>I think that if you read through a few ICCA journals, you would >>realize that I was being far more objective than you might think. >> >>The level of most publications there is far below this thesis. > >Haven't read them, but then I wouldn't expect them to get a degree for it. > >-S. >>-- >>GCP
This page took 0.01 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.