csrins

Student. Teacher. Softsmith.

Archive for the 'Education' Category


Me Against The Tech

Posted by csrins on May 11, 2008

Okay. It’s not technically all tech in consideration… I’m writing about the specific domain of software and related hardware.

How many times have we encountered folks throw up their arms and exclaim, “Oh I’m just hopeless with this tech.”

And what’s the “tech” in question?

Most times… something as asinine as getting a word-processor to not nudge a chart into la-la land on some other page.

Yet, it’s amazing how much effort people put in to learning hip and cool hard-to-use tech even if simpler and effective alternatives exist. Plus of course the smug superiority of those-who-know is a major barrier for widespread use of best-practices.

Or perhaps, folks just like the pain of it all. (Yay for the appeal of sweeping generalizations.)

Posted in Education, General, Innovation, Opinion, Pop Culture, Quick Takes | No Comments »

Testimonials for software…

Posted by csrins on April 5, 2008

Testimonials galore!

Testimonials for software are wildly rampant. They range from endorsements to scathing rants about operating systems, compilers, web browsers, games to productivity suites.

And they’re no different from the various gimmicks marketed on tele-shopping networks.

Rational logic seems to head out to lunch when “expert” opinions come forth at dizzying rates, when the distinction between belief, opinion, extrapolation and fact gets blurred, where the writers resort to “neat” tricks that show off their “mastery”.

However, it’s not just software. We are now sifting through more mis-information than ever, where “research” and “reporting” seem to be  pulling numbers and statements out of your most-favorite-anatomical-organ.

Posted in Education, General, Innovation, Opinion, Pop Culture, Quick Takes, Software Engineering, Student Notes | No Comments »

Earth Hour == Guilt Absolution?

Posted by csrins on March 30, 2008

Yet another Earth Hour has passed us by.

And… what is the outcome?Absolutely nothing. Earth Hour is hip. Earth Hour is happening. Earth Hour is trendy. It’s everything that’s glorified in a consumerist frenzy.

It’s the belittling of a much  more thought-engaging problem.

What are the aims of Earth Hour? To raise awareness? Awareness of how many candles we can light up in 3600 seconds around the globe?

The fundamental motive of Earth Hour is laudable. Being responsible in the use of resources, minimizing wasteful exploitation — these should be practiced throughout the year. A token gesture of turning off the power for one hour achieves nothing.

Irrespective of whether “global warming” is a concern or not, intelligent use of available resources is always a good idea.

Want not… waste not!

What is needed is not a slanging match on the “good” or “bad” of Earth Hour, rather a coherent and cogent process of thought in proper design and usage of all resources.

For instance, let’s not turn a surface railway station into a poorly lit and ventilated mausoleum, needing powered illumination even during the brightest day!!

Vashi Railway Station and IT Park (Vashi, India)

(External image linked from wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Vashi_Railway_Station_IT_Park.jpg)

Posted in Earth Hour, Education, Human Interface Guidelines, Innovation, Opinion, Pop Culture, Usability Engineering | 2 Comments »

Innovation ANU Event: Intellectual Property Seminar

Posted by csrins on March 26, 2008

Wednesday 26 March 2008, The Australian National University, Canberra

Innovation ANU organized a talk by Dr Andrew Blattman from SPRUSON & FERGUSON Patent and Trade Mark Attorneys as the second event in a series of staged business and commercialization development seminars. The talk highlighted issues in intellectual property management within an academic R&D context.

Dispelling the commonly prevalent notion that patents and intellectual property merely applied to”tangible inventions”, Dr Blattman made a cogent presentation on what constitutes potentially patentable material. A patent is neither a ticket to fame nor guaranteed commercialization success. Rather it is a contract for a limited monopoly for a tangible representation of an artifact of intellectual value. The onus of enforcing the monopoly rests on the agency filing for the patent, which is of variable duration in different legal jurisdictions around the globe. If shrewdly exploited, Intellectual Property (IP) can be leveraged to realize a strong competitive advantage.

IP can be viewed as a tradable commodity. “Small players” can actually leverage IP to enable negotiation and cross-licensing when needs and rights clash in a business context. Since IP can be summed up to be pretty much an organization’s most valuable asset, we would not be too fallacious in making a rather sweeping generalization that an organization may afford to lose money, but it cannot afford to lose IP.

IP management encompasses various avatars and forms (trademarks, designs, copyrights, trade secrets, and patents).

Trademarks can cover different attributes such as sound, smell, shape and color – attributes which may be perceived as branding and enhancing the value of the product under consideration. Trademarks can be extended for perpetuity and are a very powerful tool for market penetration and brand recognition.

Neither copyrights protect against exploitation of the process via “independent” discovery, nor do trade secrets against “reverse engineering”.

A patent is the broadest form of IP protection. It provides a temporary monopoly, an exclusion right to prevent others from exploiting the invention. In Australia, the details of the patent are published no later than 18 months after first filing.

However, filing patents is an expensive, extended and time-consuming process. In spite of this, their use as an arsenal is invaluable. The cost of initial research is always quite high, and a patent can provide a monopoly for commercial exploitation to recoup the associated developmental expenditure. It is interesting to note the absence of permission for “experimental use” of an existing patent in Australia.

What exactly is “patentable” material varies between jurisdictions. However, software is patentable in most areas, as are business processes and any invention that may have a “technical application”.

The first step in filing a patent application is identifying the inventive step, if a patent has scope for commercial applications, then the market views it to be worthwhile. In Australia, “absolute novelty” (novelty in all global jurisdictions) is a necessary prerequisite. The “inventive step” is the differentiating characteristic of the patent from prior art.

Protecting novelty and inventive step in an academic context is a tough balancing act, since the academic process usually incorporates a “publish early and often” disclosure paradigm, and publication is deemed to be full-disclosure without any accompanying protection.

Dr Blattman then outlined the “best practices” for successful IP management.

A successful approach to capturing the inventive step in research involves regular IP audits, early involvement of domain experts (for review), and spreading the associated risk with mitigation measures in place.

The importance of prior-art search was reiterated – it’s always crucial to know about the competition.

Though it is best to file early and often, prohibitive costs often recommend a tempered mean with the claim being sufficiently broad in scope.

However, waiting for the patent process to run its due course does not necessarily preclude publication of results. Publishing within the scope of the application may be practiced prudently. In a university environment, a student is usually the owner of IP related research.

Recommendations for successful IP management involve strategies such as

  1. aiming for broad coverage in the patent
  2. building an incremental patent portfolio and
  3. defining a set publication policy.

In a nutshell, successful IP management is:

  1. understanding of the technology and the market
  2. having a sound commercialization strategy
  3. identifying and understanding the landscape early on, and
  4. building a portfolio on this basis.

Posted in ANU, Education, Events, Innovation, Software Engineering, The Australian National University | 1 Comment »

Artificial Intelligence - The May 2007 Paper

Posted by csrins on April 12, 2007

Posted in Artificial Intelligence, Education, M.Sc. Computer Science | 1 Comment »

Artificial Intelligence - Schema Survival Probability

Posted by csrins on April 2, 2007

Posted in Artificial Intelligence, Education, M.Sc. Computer Science | No Comments »

Event: BarCamp Canberra

Posted by csrins on January 31, 2007

BarCampCanberra

When:

Saturday, 3-4 March 2007

Where:

TBA

What:

Share knowledge and information

More Info:

http://barcamp.org/BarCampCanberra

Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 2.5 License

Posted in BarCampCanberra, Education, Events, General | No Comments »

Data Warehousing and Mining - Unit 13 - Review Questions

Posted by csrins on December 15, 2006

Data Warehousing and Mining - Unit 13 - Architectures of Data Mining Systems

  1. What are the characteristics of a desired architecture for data mining systems?
  2. Discuss the following coupling schemes for a DB/DW/DM system:
    1. No coupling
    2. Loose coupling
    3. Semitight coupling
    4. Tight coupling
  3.  Discuss the merits of the different coupling schemes for a DB/DW/DM system.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 2.5 License.

Posted in Data Warehousing and Mining, Education, M.Sc. Computer Science | No Comments »

Data Warehousing and Mining - Unit 12 - Review Questions

Posted by csrins on December 15, 2006

Data Warehousing and Mining - Unit 12 - Data Mining Query Language

  1. Discuss the importance of a data mining query language.
  2. What are the challenges faced in the design of an effective data mining query language?
  3.  With a suitable example elaborate how DMQL can be used to specify task-relevant data for an association relationship.
  4. Illustrate with an example the application of DMQL for specifying the kind of knowledge to be mined.
  5. What is a meta pattern? How can it be used in DMQL to mine association rules?
  6. Present DMQL for specifying a concept hierarchy.
  7. Discuss the DMQL syntax for pattern interestingness measures.
  8. How can DMQL be used to specify the forms of presentation and visualization used in displaying the discovered patterns?

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 2.5 License.

Posted in Data Warehousing and Mining, Education, M.Sc. Computer Science | No Comments »

Data Warehousing and Mining - Unit 11 - Review Questions

Posted by csrins on December 15, 2006

Data Warehousing and Mining - Unit 11 - Data Mining Primitives

  1. Discuss how a data mining query can be defined in terms of data mining primitives.
  2. Enumerate the different primitives for specifying a data mining task.
  3. What is task-relevant data? Explain. How is it related to a minable view?
  4. Dicuss in brief the kind of knowledge to be mined and its determination of the data mining function.
  5. Define the following terms:
    1. Concept hierarchies
    2. Schema hierarchies
    3. Set-grouping hierarchies
    4. Operation-derived hierarchies
    5. Rule-based hierarchies
  6. Explain and discuss the following interestingness measures:
    1. Simplicity
    2. Certainty
    3. Reliability
    4. Novelty
  7. What is the importance of visualization of discovered patterns? Explain the role of presentation in pattern visualization.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 2.5 License.

Posted in Data Warehousing and Mining, Education, M.Sc. Computer Science | No Comments »