Vita:QuILT offers - Laptörténet

Pitlik, 2019. március 17., 06:42-n

2019-03-17T06:42:25Z

Pitlik, 2019. március 17., 06:41-n

2019-03-17T06:41:38Z

Pitlik, 2019. március 17., 06:40-n

2019-03-17T06:40:58Z

Pitlik, 2019. március 17., 06:39-n

2019-03-17T06:39:24Z

Pitlik, 2019. március 17., 06:38-n

2019-03-17T06:38:52Z

Pitlik: Új oldal, tartalma: „Abstracts from customized discussions with Students (text parts just from the conductors): Starting level In order to approximate the KNUTH's principle, it would be…”

2019-03-17T06:38:07Z

Új oldal, tartalma: „Abstracts from customized discussions with Students (text parts just from the conductors): Starting level In order to approximate the KNUTH's principle, it would be…”

Új lap

Abstracts from customized discussions with Students (text parts just from the conductors):

Starting level

In order to approximate the KNUTH's principle, it would be nice to have attributes for comparing/evaluating versions of expert systems = EXS (for the same problem). Therefore a specific (not obligatory:-) offer e.g. for you:
- there will be a lot of EXS-versions (=objects) about the same content
- task Nr.1 = a lot of attributes of these objects should be defined (name, description of the measurement, unit, direction)
- task Nr.2 = each version should be evaluated based on each single attribute (what leads to an OAM = object-attribute-matrix)
- task Nr.3 = the best version should be derived based on the OAM
- task Nr.4 = one of the still not ideal EXS-version (object) should be re-designed so, that the new version will not be the same as one of the already available EXS-versions and the redesigned version will be at least norm-like
- task Nr.5 = the whole process should be documented in a detailed way (= online publication )
- Motto: EXSs are services - and we want to design better and better services...

Reaction level

*tasks/offers are unusual
*hard to solve
*what should be made in an operative level?
**redoing tasks
**finalizing tasks
*is a solution wrong?

Conclusion level

*Worth interpreting:
**https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LNHBMFCzznE
**BTW: The customized co-operation should be ensure effectivity and efficiency of the learning processes...)

*First of all:
**Offers are facultative tasks. Nobody has any responsibilities...
**Offers are just possibilities.

*On the other hand:
**redoing a task would/could mean: the solution was wrong, but not a single solutions can be seen as wrong, yet: mostly each solution could be made better and better
**finishing a task would/could mean: the solution will become excellent, but mostly not a single solutions can be seen as the final truth, it means again and again: mostly each solution could be made better and better
**the offers from me should make possible to find (together) a task where not just the surface but a lot of details could be interpreted mostly in form of a (common?:-) publication
**unusual tasks = new challenges to have have the chance to be "better" (to see more complex)... BUT each task may be refused/rejected....
**A new joke in Hungary says: Blond woman = I will never drive to a place where I have been never before... (Conclusion: this lady will stay on the spot for ever:-)
**EXS-offer before: (1) this course tries to support the change of thinking methodologies - it means: we always need evaluation rules like a navigation system needs an objective function (e.g. fastest route, shortest route, etc.) in order to be capable of ranking alternative routes ---- in our particular case: in order to be capable of ranking expert systems
**EXS-offer before: (2) this offer is a kind of task needing to solve by conductors - but to be a conductor is just a role - everybody should be able to play each potential roles... :-)
**Operative summary:
***there is no obligation
***there are just possibilities (these emails could be seen as a kind of customized test and/or co-operation)
**Wrong or correct?
***These black and white evaluations are not relevant here and now.
***Good-Better-Best... this is a scale, where we have to go on step by step...

*Please, do not forget:
**conductors have hardly declarations contrary to teachers....
**Conductors are just a kind of "silent" observers (who initiate situations to create possibilities for common activities)
**Declarations should be swotted / crammed (= literaly known) - but situative games should "just" interpreted.
**Declarations are mostly not the final truth. Own interpretations are the best signs for the development of competences...

← Régebbi változat		A lap 2019. március 17., 06:42-kori változata
55. sor:		55. sor:
	**Declarations should be swotted / crammed (= literaly known) - but situative games should "just" interpreted.		**Declarations should be swotted / crammed (= literaly known) - but situative games should "just" interpreted.
	**Declarations are mostly not the final truth. Own interpretations are the best signs for the development of competences...		**Declarations are mostly not the final truth. Own interpretations are the best signs for the development of competences...
		+	*Worth reading?!
		+	**https://miau.my-x.hu/mediawiki/index.php/QuILT_offers#Offers_during_the_courses
		+	**https://miau.my-x.hu/mediawiki/index.php/QuILT-IK057-Diary#Advanced_version

@@ 32. sor: / 32. sor: @@
 *Worth interpreting:
 **https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LNHBMFCzznE
-**BTW: The customized co-operation should be ensure effectivity and efficiency of the learning processes...)
+**BTW: The customized co-operation should be ensure effectivity and efficiency of the learning processes...
 *First of all:
 **Offers are facultative tasks. Nobody has any responsibilities...

@@ 4. sor: / 4. sor: @@
 In order to approximate the KNUTH's principle, it would be nice to have attributes for comparing/evaluating versions of expert systems = EXS (for the same problem). Therefore a specific (not obligatory:-) offer e.g. for you:
-- there will be a lot of EXS-versions (=objects) about the same content
+*there will be a lot of EXS-versions (=objects) about the same content
-- task Nr.1 = a lot of attributes of these objects should be defined (name, description of the measurement, unit, direction)
+*task Nr.1 = a lot of attributes of these objects should be defined (name, description of the measurement, unit, direction)
-- task Nr.2 = each version should be evaluated based on each single attribute (what leads to an OAM = object-attribute-matrix)
+*task Nr.2 = each version should be evaluated based on each single attribute (what leads to an OAM = object-attribute-matrix)
-- task Nr.3 = the best version should be derived based on the OAM
+*task Nr.3 = the best version should be derived based on the OAM
-- task Nr.4 = one of the still not ideal EXS-version (object) should be re-designed so, that the new version will not be the same as one of the already available EXS-versions and the redesigned version will be at least norm-like
+*task Nr.4 = one of the still not ideal EXS-version (object) should be re-designed so, that the new version will not be the same as one of the already available EXS-versions and the redesigned version will be at least norm-like
-- task Nr.5 = the whole process should be documented in a detailed way (= online publication )
+*task Nr.5 = the whole process should be documented in a detailed way (= online publication )
-- Motto: EXSs are services - and we want to design better and better services...
+*Motto: EXSs are services - and we want to design better and better services...
   Reaction level

@@ 30. sor: / 30. sor: @@
 **Offers are just possibilities.
 *On the other hand:
-**redoing a task would/could mean: the solution was wrong, but not a single solutions can be seen as wrong, yet: mostly each solution could be made better and better
+**Redoing a task would/could mean: the solution was wrong, but not a single solutions can be seen as wrong, yet: mostly each solution could be made better and better
-**finishing a task would/could mean: the solution will become excellent, but mostly not a single solutions can be seen as the final truth, it means again and again: mostly each solution could be made better and better
+**Finishing a task would/could mean: the solution will become excellent, but mostly not a single solutions can be seen as the final truth, it means again and again: mostly each solution could be made better and better
-**the offers from me should make possible to find (together) a task where not just the surface but a lot of details could be interpreted mostly in form of a (common?:-) publication
+**The offers from me should make possible to find (together) a task where not just the surface but a lot of details could be interpreted mostly in form of a (common?:-) publication
 **unusual tasks = new challenges to have have the chance to be "better" (to see more complex)...  BUT each task may be refused/rejected....
 **A new joke in Hungary says: Blond woman = I will never drive to a place where I have been never before... (Conclusion: this lady will stay on the spot for ever:-)
@@ 38. sor: / 38. sor: @@
 **EXS-offer before: (2) this offer is a kind of task needing to solve by conductors - but to be a conductor is just a role - everybody should be able to play each potential roles... :-)
 **Operative summary:
-***there is no obligation
+***There is no obligation
-***there are just possibilities (these emails could be seen as a kind of customized test and/or co-operation)
+***There are just possibilities (these emails could be seen as a kind of customized test and/or co-operation)
 **Wrong or correct?
 ***These black and white evaluations are not relevant here and now.
 ***Good-Better-Best... this is a scale, where we have to go on step by step...
 *Please, do not forget:
-**conductors have hardly declarations contrary to teachers....
+**Conductors have hardly declarations contrary to teachers....
 **Conductors are just a kind of "silent" observers (who initiate situations to create possibilities for common activities)
 **Declarations should be swotted / crammed (= literaly known) - but situative games should "just" interpreted.
 **Declarations are mostly not the final truth. Own interpretations are the best signs for the development of competences...