„Vita:QuILT-IK045-Diary” változatai közötti eltérés
A Miau Wiki wikiből
(→2. Day (2019.II.20)) |
(→2. Day (2019.II.20)) |
||
| 70. sor: | 70. sor: | ||
****https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Semantic-Similarity-Based-on-Corpus-Statistics-and-Jiang-Conrath/011ffa226a58b6711ce509609b8336911325b0e0 | ****https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Semantic-Similarity-Based-on-Corpus-Statistics-and-Jiang-Conrath/011ffa226a58b6711ce509609b8336911325b0e0 | ||
***the last game should be about an abstraction (like knowledge, competence, competency, intelligence, information, data, etc.) | ***the last game should be about an abstraction (like knowledge, competence, competency, intelligence, information, data, etc.) | ||
| − | ***the more sophisticated is a definition the more people are able to guess it in frame of a barkochba-game and/or the less time is required for the guessing (c.f. the less amount of questions and/or the more trivial are these questions) | + | ****the more sophisticated is a definition the more people are able to guess it in frame of a barkochba-game and/or the less time is required for the guessing (c.f. the less amount of questions and/or the more trivial are these questions) |
| − | ***control view: Is a series of question capable of classifying each focused expression (like knowledge, competence, competency, intelligence, information, data, etc.) in one single system? | + | ****control view: Is a series of question capable of classifying each focused expression (like knowledge, competence, competency, intelligence, information, data, etc.) in one single system? |
*Important questions: | *Important questions: | ||
**Why should we have definitions at all? | **Why should we have definitions at all? | ||
A lap 2019. február 22., 14:02-kori változata
1. Day (2019.II.13)
Conclusions after the first meeting:
- the potential/wished chained effect (the connection between two courses based on a single person having both courses behind each other) should be stopped because the single person has a correction in the course registration
- the next task should be a task being capable of catalyzing personal confrontations with operative details because
- on the surface, messages/phenomena seem to be evident
- but the "devil" is in the details
- the next tasks should support to finalize/catalyze already initialized topics like
- creation of evaluation rule sets for arbitrary phenomena (definitions, co-operations, rule sets, etc.)
- creation of re-definition-chains in a successive way demonstrating the potential of the complexity
- the next task should also be capable of
- approximating professional contents (like new keywords parallel to the basic keyword of knowledge)
- deriving temporary winners (e.g. the best definitions and the appropriate rule set ensuring robotized evaluation processes)
- Students should have more time for solutions of the next tasks in order
- to confront with each relevant detail
- but always being supervised by other Students and/or conductors during the whole time for solutions
Remarks: Students should also be more active (c.f. the history of the QuILT system demonstrates what can be seen later in an objective way...)
Remarks: Students could be more active in NEPTUN (through answering email's from the conductors) and/or in MOODLE (creating more definitions and re-definitions in frame of the appropriate forums).
Annexes:
- Demo of rule sets for evaluation of definitions: https://miau.my-x.hu/miau/quilt/OT1c.xlsx
- (The file should be discussed sooner or later in details.)
- Defintions of knowledge: https://miau.my-x.hu/miau/quilt/OT1a.docx
- (each version will be analyzed in a separate way and in connection to each other)
- (the results will be published as a kind of learning material)
2. Day (2019.II.20)
Conclusions after the second meeting:
Prompt Neptun-email: Dear All, thank you for your activities in the Moodle system. It would be nice to have definitions from each single Student. A suggestion to the homework: https://miau.my-x.hu/miau/quilt/Definitions_of_knowledge.docx - this first paper (learning material) needs your remarks: e.g. your own definition and/or the definitions of others (see in Moodle) https://moodle.kodolanyi.hu/mod/forum/discuss.php?d=44464 should be classified/interpreted compared to each other (see e.g. sub-chapter: Possible conclusions)... It is possible to create new groups (highlighted keywords)... Best regards Laszlo Pitlik
- a kind of massive lack of satisfaction could be detected concerning the usefulness of the chained translation
- the existence of the critical aspect is relevant
- critics should be formulated in written form incl. arguments and detailed improvements
- detailed critics needs detailed experiences:
- theoretical aspects are not always relevant enough till own experiences do not exist
- detecting a joke through artificial intelligence is a high-level challenge (c.f. Turing-test)
- being independent from a mentor (c.f. AWS vs. chained translation) is an important level of the expected/needed sovereignty
- a kind of massive acceptance could be detected in case of the Rosling-animation (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jbkSRLYSojo&t=218s)
- a kind of massive and instinctive misunderstanding of chaos/pattern could be detected in case of the Pendulum-video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YhMiuzyU1ag)
- the Rosling-animation works with chaos and it derives a kind of pattern-like figure
- the Pendulum is a kind of strong pattern without or points of views, but the subjective perspectives can lead to misunderstandings of physical phenomena
- the detected antagonisms should be solved
- see learning material Nr.2 - ASAP
- in order to see the first impulses about research activities
- the chained translation is not the unique/single way to detect weaknesses in a definition
- we need to play barkochba-games
- at first: a plant or animal should be derived based on the animal taxonomy / plant systematics
- the second attempt should be a subject (like steering wheel of a car - it means a technical object or a particular type/model of cars)
- http://www.jot.fm/issues/issue_2004_05/article4/
- https://ai2-s2-public.s3.amazonaws.com/figures/2017-08-08/011ffa226a58b6711ce509609b8336911325b0e0/4-Figure1-1.png or
- https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Semantic-Similarity-Based-on-Corpus-Statistics-and-Jiang-Conrath/011ffa226a58b6711ce509609b8336911325b0e0
- the last game should be about an abstraction (like knowledge, competence, competency, intelligence, information, data, etc.)
- the more sophisticated is a definition the more people are able to guess it in frame of a barkochba-game and/or the less time is required for the guessing (c.f. the less amount of questions and/or the more trivial are these questions)
- control view: Is a series of question capable of classifying each focused expression (like knowledge, competence, competency, intelligence, information, data, etc.) in one single system?
- we need to play barkochba-games
- Important questions:
- Why should we have definitions at all?
- Where should we use definitions at all?
- (Already known question: Which definition is better than an other definition?)
- supporting remarks into the learning material Nr.1: https://miau.my-x.hu/miau/quilt/Definitions_of_knowledge.docx
- positive remarks in form of questions: https://miau.my-x.hu/miau/quilt/demo_questions_to_important_messages.docx
- negative remarks (see critics above): with arguments and detailed improvements at once
3. Day (2019.II.27)
Conclusions after the second meeting:
