EVA 5: Self Assesment

The last blog entry is about questioning yourself about what you have learned and how you compare to your colleagues. Since I don't know my colleagues very well and the communication went through the team meetings, this self-evaluation is difficult for me. Nevertheless, I noticed some points where I did better and other things that my colleagues did much better.


Managing Yourself

What did I (not) learn? Can I …

  • ...read / understand a scientific paper?
At the beginning of the course, I was a bit scared when I encountered papers because of the mathematical formulas, figures and texts, some of which were difficult to read. Thanks to this course, I feel better prepared to read papers more purposefully. 
  • ...obtain more information / do literature research?
In my opinion, this was unfortunately hardly covered in the course, but it is very easy to find further sources thanks to arxiv, Google scholar and IEES.
  • ...put research in context (with respect to current state of the art in the field)?
This was discussed and it was shown to me how difficult it is to evaluate such papers with respect to current state of the art.
  • ...form my own scientific opinion/judgement?
Yes and the evaluation template from blog entry number 4 (Scientific review) is very helpful for this matter.
  • … present scientific results in different ways? (Blog, orally, presentation, written document)
At the beginning of the course I had a lot of trouble with blog entries and it took a lot of time to create an entry. But after each blog entry, the writing went much better and also thanks to the feedback of the professor, I was able to write better. 
  • ... engage in a scientific discussion, express my view, formulate criticism?
I never had problems with discussing or formulate criticism.


Compare yourself with others

How do I assess my performance, compared with my colleagues?
  • – What did I do better?
I think I presented a little better than my colleagues.
  • -What did I do better?
Some of the blogs (I didn't read all) are way better than mine and have a "storyline", wehereas I jumped straight into the topic.
  • – Where do I still have need for improvement?
General writing
  • – What could I learn from my peers?
How to write with a storyline
  • – Am I able to give & accept (constructive) criticism?
Yes ;)


The AI seminar helped me a lot to improve my writing skills and how to read papers more purposefully. I truely enjoyed this course and I am looking forward to the final presenation.




Comments

  1. Pascal Sager7 June 2021 at 00:15

    Dear Antonio,
    I like that you answered each of the questions from the slides (my blog post is a bit more unstructured compared to yours). I like that you highlight what you have learned and I'm convinced that this will help you in the long run, for example when writing your Master's thesis.
    I think writing in particular (which you point out as your weakness) is a matter of practice. I am not a good writer myself, but I feel much more confident by doing it regularly. I hope that you feel the same way and wish you much success, especially in scientific communication in your future career :).

    Best, Pascal

    ReplyDelete
  2. /meshkian8 June 2021 at 02:44

    Dear Antonio,

    Thanks for the last blogpost. As Pascal mentioned, your to-the-point blogs are clear and structured, and one can easily follow them. Writing is a process that takes time to master but very useful in the future when writing reports become an essential part of the job.

    All the best,
    Mohsen

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Blog post 3: Understanding content

Image
I chose the paper Generative Adversarial Networks[1] from Ian Goodfellow, which I am going to review what the main points are and how it works. Intorduction Generative Adversarial Networks, or GANs for short, are an approach to generative modeling using deep learning methods. Generative modeling is an unsupervised learning task in machine learning that involves automatically discovering and learning the regularities or patterns in input data in such a way that the model can be used to generate or output new examples that plausibly could have been drawn from the original dataset.[1,2,3,4] How does it work? GANs consists of two networks, a Generator G(x), and a Discriminator D(x). They both play an adversarial game where the generator tries to fool the discriminator by generating data similar to those in the training set. The Discriminator tries not to be fooled by identifying fake data from real data. They both work simultaneously to learn and train complex data like audio, video or ima
Read more
 Blog Post 2: Writing Style This second post is describing, what makes a writing output a good (or bad) piece of text, especially regarding the organization of the paper, wording without looking at the content.  I chose the paper Generative Adversarial Networks from Ian J. Goodfellow (https://arxiv.org/pdf/1406.2661.pdf), as I am very interested in this topic, my master thesis is about GANs and this paper is already familiar with me. It propose a new framework for estimating generative models via an adversarial process, in which the researchers simultaneously train two models: a generative model G that captures the data distribution, and a discriminative model D that estimates the probability that a sample came from the training data rather than G. This paper is often cited and is also the starting point for anyone who learns about GANs, even though that paper is from 2014! Paper Title The title is short and sweet, at it is called "Generative Adversarial Nets". Everybody who
Read more

Scientific review

 I chose the paper Generative Adversarial Networks[1] from Ian Goodfellow, which I am going to evaluate how good the paper is. I am going to use the IJCAI review template to asses the quality of this paper. Relevance – Is the paper fully within the scope of the conference? Will the questions and results of the paper be of interest to researchers in the field? This paper has demonstrated the viability of the adversarial modeling framework, suggesting that these research directions could prove useful. It opens up quite a few paths, as a lot of problems have a limited data set, so now it would be possible to enrich synthetically those data sets. Significance – Is this a significant advance in the state of the art? Is this a paper that people are likely to read and cite? Does the paper address an important problem? Does it open new research directions? Is it a paper that is likely to have a lasting impact? This is a significant advance in the state of the art and shows a novel idea. As it
Read more