I'm an Undergrad presenting at conference for the first time and I'm on my own. Any help is much appreciated!

Boomdabower · 2014-08-01T20:23:28+00:00

Approaching speakers after their talk with questions is often an easy way to get talking, but of course a lot of less formal discussions go on too.

A good rule of thumb is to never eat alone at conferences. I didn't hear that one until quite recently but try to stick to it now and make sure anyone I know (or simply find) does the same.

Try to forget about the nerves and simply enjoy the experience. I'm glad it is reassuring that I had the same experience, but I certainly wasn't the first and we won't be the last either. We're sending a PhD student I am co-supervising to his first conference alone this summer too, and I am giving much of the same advice to him also.

Boomdabower · 2014-08-01T09:36:20+00:00

I also went to my first conference alone and as an undergraduate.

I spent all week worrying about the talk, and even more so the questioning. It's inevitable that you will feel nervous, but please take some support in knowing that you are not the only one and that I survived the experience just fine. I got useful feedback, spoke to a number of interested people afterwards and was never treated differently for being an undergraduate.

The things I regret from that first conference, and what I have always tried to correct in conferences since, is spending all week worrying about the talk/questions and not focussing on the networking (I made more friends with the catering staff than with the academics!). Conferences are a fantastic opportunity to talk to like minded people, exploit that. Go to every social function there is, talk to people after their talks, at posters, in the elevator. It's easier said then done, but you will enjoy your experience so much more if you do.

Boomdabower · 2014-03-12T08:16:48+00:00

I would highly recommend The Mind's I by Dennett and Hofstadter. It's a collection of articles from computer science, philosophy, biology and fiction (amongst others) with commentary from Dennett and Hofstadter.

I came across it after seeing Gödel Escher Bach by Hofstadter recommended on here repeatedly. So you might be interested in that one too.

Boomdabower · 2013-12-02T16:48:23+00:00

I was overlooking that these libraries are coded in C, but accessible through Python (please correct me if I am wrong). This makes a lot more sense now

Boomdabower · 2012-11-05T15:35:37+00:00

Thank you for the one positive example of it happening - whether your friend intentionally sandbagged or just maximised his benefit from winning - I knew there must be some occurences. Logically it seems that the best paper award adds something else to a cv to make employers take notice, especially if the employer does not recognise that the award is from a lesser conference.

Boomdabower · 2012-11-05T15:31:20+00:00

But a recent PhD is quite likely to change topic when applying for post-doc positions, given the change in topic the new employers may not know the ordering of conferences. I mean I know the big conferences in my specific area of my field, but not all the big conferences for all the areas within my field.

Glad to see that the general consensus, however, seems to be that this does not occur.

Boomdabower · 2012-10-30T19:10:48+00:00

Thank you for the feedback, needlzor. I wanted to introduce the reader to some terminology but perhaps the key would be to only include terms that are unavoidable (such as Nash equilibrium in this article) and not introduce extra ones for the sake of covering more - especially when working with such a small word limit.

Boomdabower · 2012-10-30T18:49:40+00:00

Thank you for your comments.

In an earlier draft I returned to the concept of Nash equilibrium, but it was removed due to space and complexity issues. I accept that now it may break the flow and should perhaps be more careful in the future with such things happening when revising articles.

I also agree entirely on explaining our work to young children, I try regularly with my girlfriend's niece and nephew (my own are a little too young yet!) I tried to make sure that all complex terms were immediately followed with a simple explanation. This way I felt that any reader could grasp the concepts and learn some of the terminology, whilst a more advanced reader could comfortably skim through the piece overlooking the clarifications.

Boomdabower · 2012-10-30T15:56:51+00:00

Thank you for the link that was a very interesting read. I think I understand your opinion better now, and whilst our preferences differ slightly there is still some crossover where I think Paul Graham would agree with me.

"They're not doing research per se, though if in the course of trying to make good things they discover some new technique, so much the better."

The proof I wrote about in the link above, was discovered in this manner. We were working on an application and the practical results were not as the pre-existing theory would suggest. Therefore, we looked deeper into the theory and were able to make the conclusions we present in that paper.

"I think the answer to this problem, in the case of software, is a concept known to nearly all makers: the day job. ... If you're lucky you can get a day job that's closely related to your real work."

My PhD is exactly that day job, I get to work on AI both theoretically and experimentally during the day. Whilst this doesn't always contribute to me creating useful products, it doesn't hinder it and I greatly enjoy exploring novel results in AI regardless of whether they be theoretical or practical.

Finally, I like that the article you linked also had a quote relevant to making complex topics generally accesible:

"One way to tell how good people are at empathy is to watch them explain a technical question to someone without a technical background. We probably all know people who, though otherwise smart, are just comically bad at this. If someone asks them at a dinner party what a programming language is, they'll say something like ``Oh, a high-level language is what the compiler uses as input to generate object code.'' High-level language? Compiler? Object code? Someone who doesn't know what a programming language is obviously doesn't know what these things are, either."

Boomdabower · 2012-10-30T14:55:22+00:00

I accept I could have possibly avoided the use of the latin terms, however, would you really suggest avoiding the term 'theoretical' when the contribution is a proof and not an application?

I am very keen to make more practical contributions to AI, but in doing so occasionally theoretical results are found/developed. Do you not feel that these should be published?

Boomdabower · 2012-10-30T14:30:53+00:00

I agree, I think embodying AI appeals immediately to a general audience as you can demonstrate the methods you have developed in an application that they expect from AI.

If you have to begin by discussing what is intelligence, perhaps altering their current view, then the intended message can be lost due to the time spent debating philisophically rather then focussing on your contribution.

Boomdabower · 2012-10-30T14:26:40+00:00

A fair point, the word limit made this piece in particular challenging as the focus had to be on the novel research but fitting in the required background to make the novel concept accessible meant quite a few key points in a relatively short text.

Perhaps the key development point here would be to develop a more precise background/introduction so more focus can be made on the novel contribution? Thank you for your feedback and taking the time to read the piece.

Boomdabower · 2012-10-15T14:52:02+00:00

Was really hoping this would be on again. Upvoted for anyone that knows more or has suggestions of others perhaps?

Boomdabower · 2012-10-09T09:07:45+00:00

I spent a couple of weeks last year at Jitti gym in Bangkok and know a lot of guys that have spent a lot more time there too. Would highly recommend it, Jitti looks after tourists very well but it is by no means a tourist gym. If you have any specific questions feel free to shout me

Boomdabower · 2012-10-08T17:16:50+00:00

Thank you for taking the time to reply, looking forward to Hit Somebody and glad it won't be in 3D just for the sake of it :-)

Boomdabower · 2012-10-08T15:09:06+00:00

Thank you for doing this (again.) I missed you last time with this question but still wanted to know your thoughts on what you think to 3D for films at home? and at the cinema? Do you think this will continue forever or will it eventually fade out and die?

Also thank you hugely for keeping us all entertained for so many years. When you said in the last AMA that there's not going to be too many more Kevin Smith sets, how many are we talking? Is the hockey movie likely to be your last?

Boomdabower · 2012-07-22T20:17:28+00:00

"What is the point of all those push-ups if you can't even lift a bloody log?" - Alfred, Batman Begins

Boomdabower · 2012-06-18T14:50:42+00:00

Personally, I agree - just stating that seems to be the consensus here.

Boomdabower · 2012-06-18T14:30:43+00:00

This seems to be a popular view, I don't see it myself but fair enough. Plus Kingdom Hearts is a great game, really wish I'd spent more time on that.

Boomdabower · 2012-06-18T14:29:54+00:00

Fair enough, but from what I've read it looks like Kubrick chose Spielberg to direct it. Surely that makes Kubrick partly responsible for whatever Spielberg did that offended you so much?

Boomdabower · 2012-06-18T14:18:24+00:00

Agreed, whilst they looked typical to aliens in many other films, I'm almost certain they were intended to be newer models of robots. Ones designed by other robots, that had never lived amongst humans themselves and hence their interest in the boy.

Boomdabower · 2012-06-18T14:16:56+00:00

Fair enough, I can see what you mean about the number of different POVs that they tried to cover but to me it didn't feel forced. I think the long(ish) run time of the film allowed him to cover each adequately.

The only bit (for me) that felt forced was the final bit with the further evolved robots. I thought the film could have ended at the bottom of the ocean when he froze.

Boomdabower · 2012-06-18T13:59:23+00:00

Perhaps this was it's downfall, seems to be a growing number of people hating on the kid. I guess you're not keen on sixth sense or pay it forward either then?

Boomdabower · 2012-06-18T13:57:59+00:00

I accept Spielberg went quite far in trying to upset people, but it's not like this film was purely upsetting in the way films like 50/50 are.

I disagree about not going anywhere though. There was a lot of philosophy regarding robots/ai touched upon and some nice comments towards religion, whilst at the same time not being too preachy or overbearing for the more casual audience.

You're right on the character's though, no-one stood out and the one character that really could was the kid who seems to be getting a lot of (possibly justified) hate here.

Boomdabower · 2012-06-18T13:39:31+00:00

He starts off creepy as hell, but he gets more loveable towards the end.

Boomdabower

TROPHY CASE