Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Chess Programmers -- take note: M. N. J. van Kervinck's Master's Thesis

Author: Sune Fischer

Date: 12:11:32 08/20/02

Go up one level in this thread


On August 20, 2002 at 14:07:08, Russell Reagan wrote:

>On August 20, 2002 at 10:54:20, Sune Fischer wrote:
>
>>Half the programmers here should get a Ph.D if this is the standard for a
>>masters.
>
>As Marc Boulé pointed out in another post, a master's thesis doesn't require any
>new material. A PhD requires completely original work. I think people are mixing
>up the requirements and thinking it all has to be new material. That's just one
>thing I've noticed in reading all of the replies. I've never written a master's
>thesis, or read very many, so I can't personally say whether this is a good one
>or not.

He quoted:
"A thesis for the Master's degree must show familiarity with previous work in
the field and must demonstrate ability to carry out research and to organize
results."

To carry out research can mean different things in english, but since it also
mentions "familiarity with previous work" I assume doing research here means to
do _original_ science. You need to be able to do both of course, stand on the
shoulders of those before you _and_ take the next step.

The difference between a master and a Ph.D. (here in DK) is that the Ph.D. is a
greater project, often lasting three times as long and you get paid while you
study. You have no supervisor as you have during the masters, you are on your
own and need to prove you can do research for yourself and solve the problems
that pops up.

When writing a Ph.D. you are expected to publish articles, that is not expected
for a masters.

Perhaps the rules differ elsewhere.

-S.

>I enjoyed it though, even if I already knew most of it. I think regardless of
>whether or not it's a good thesis, it is a good paper. In reading it I got many
>new ideas (not directly from the paper, but it made me think of new ideas). I
>think it is similar to how they recommend that you re-read a chess book after
>every 200 point ELO improvement, because you will understand things you didn't
>pick up on before.
>
>Anyway, according to the requirements put forth by Marc Boulé in his response,
>this sounds like a master's thesis to me, but not a PhD thesis.
>
>Russell



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.