35 Matching Annotations
  1. Feb 2019
    1. Machine Learning is a method of statistical learning where each instance in a dataset is described by a set of features or attributes. In contrast, the term “Deep Learning” is a method of statistical learning that extracts features or attributes from raw data.

      difference between ML and DL! ML: each instance in a dataset is described by a set of features/attributes DL: extract features/attributes from raw data. It constructs rich representations of the data automatically.

    1. A System for Approaching Revision

      Many writing experts suggest that revision should be approaches in a top-down manner by addressing high-order concerns (HOCs) before moving on to lower-order concerns (LOCs).

      Higher order concerns: global issues such as thesis, argument and organization Lower order concerns: local issues such as grammar and mechanics.

    2. Writers require to develop their personal writing or revision process!

  2. Jan 2019
    1. Design’s role is to contribute a humanist perspective that considers the social, political, ethical, cultural, and environmental factors of implementing AI into daily human-to-computer interactions.

      what's the community role for such kinds of AI-human design?

    1. Design-Infused

      democratic althernatives

    2. Participatory Mindset

      co-creating

    3. Myerson’s “Scaling Down” approach

      what makes groups of people similar -> what makes them different

  3. Nov 2018
    1. Start with the major points going down towards minor issues

      major issues first, minor issues later

    2. If you do think a reviewer missed something that was in your paper, don’t outright state this, kindly direct them to this information

      don't outright state reviewers' misunderstanding do kindly direct them to this info

    3. understand where each of the reviewers stand. Who is the most positive (or the paper’s champion) and who is the most negative (the paper’s destroyer)?

      1st read: understand where each of the reviewers stand!

      • who is the most positive?
      • who is the most negative?
    1. the act of formulating questions enables us “to organize our thinking around what we don’t know.”

      formulating questions enables us "to organize our thinking around what we don't know."

  4. Oct 2018
    1. (1) Describing what was done.(2) Describingwhat was found(key results)

      Two main things for effective abstract: 1) describe what was done 2) describe what was found

    1. the 2-2-2 rule: Always have two manuscripts in preparation, two under review, and two in press.

      2-2-2 rule

    1. One question I had was Figure 3, which purports to show significant differences in a post-experimental measure of learning, but for which the ratings look substantially the same (varying between 55 and 65 on a scale labeled "ratings"). It would probably help to have some additional information or some comment in the text about why this is significant (i.e., there must be small but consistent differences across subjects?).

      weakness of the paper

    2. The research does not seem to offer much, however, beyond what has already been published.

      reviewer's opinion

    3. These can inform choices between certain menu types in UI design.

      highlight contributions to the field of HCI

    4. The paper presents a set of six guidelines on menu design, drawn from two experiments studying menu selection in the presence of other targets on a GUI desktop.

      summary

    5. Writing the Review

      1) read the paper thoroughly 2) summarize your main points 3) relevant past work 4) significance of contribution and benefit 5) coverage of all the criteria 6) review "as is" 7) polite, temperate language

    6. a design briefing a development methodology or tools an interaction technique an interactive system a reflective analysis results from fieldwork and ethnography, e.g., findings, guidelines, etc. results from laboratory studies, e.g., findings, techniques, methods, etc. theory or model.

      type of contributions

    7. in two or three sentences, what contribution the paper aims to make to the field of Human-Computer Interaction

      Summarize the contributions (2~3 sentences)

      • what contribution the paper aims to make to the field of HCI
    1. Introduction, Related Work, Main Section, Results, and Discussion

      Introduction (Related Work) Method Results Discussion

    1. Collectively all of these commentaries should be directed to helping authors produce the best papers possible, whether a particular paper is ultimately accepted to a venue or not, and are an essential outcome of the review process.

      the goal of review is to help authors produce the best papers possible!

    2. a good meta-review also discusses what comments you weighted more heavily from the reviewers, and why, in reaching your evaluation of the paper.

      good meta-review -> weight more heavily from reviews, and why

    3. Writing a good meta-review is a lot like writing a good review, only it takes into account the points raised by all of the reviewers, rather than just reflecting your own opinion.

      good meta-review: -> consider all of the reviewers' opinions

    4. make great suggestions for how the authors could improve the articulation or organization of their work

      good review: 1) make great suggestions for how the authors could improve the articulation or organization of their work

    5. The Good Review will raise smart and tough questions which the authors can then address in their revisions, or it might raise fresh considerations or new aspects of a design space that the authors hadn't fully fleshed out.

      good review: 1) raise smart and tough questions which the authors can address in their revisions 2) raise fresh considerations or new aspects of a design space that the authors hadn't fully fleshed out

    6. how the author’s arguments, results, and demonstrations fit into closely related work as well as the field as a whole.

      argument + results + demonstration + related word + the field, all of them should tight together!

    7. raise whole new perspectives and angles of contribution that might be suggested by the work, or propose connections to areas of the literature that the author might not have thought of or even been aware of.

      good review: 1) raise whole new perspectives and angles of contributions 2) propose connections to literature that the author might not have been aware of

    8. The Good Review reflects on the contributions or possible contributions of the work, and discusses the weaknesses and limitations in a positive manner, but most particularly clearly calls out the strengths and utility of the work as well.

      Good Review 1) reflect on the contributions of the work 2) discuss the weaknesses and limitations in a positive manner 3) clearly call out the strengths and utility of the work

  5. Aug 2018
    1. Learners not using reflective thinking in problem solving, tend to be less systematic in collecting information and data, spend less time on planning the solution beforehand and usually do not consider alternative methods (Van Mierenboer, 1990:45).

      learners tend to not use reflective thinking in problem solving.

    2. Self-regulated learning implies that effective learners are actively involved in their own learning through metacognitive, motivational and behavioural processes (Zimmerman, 1990:4)

      self-regulated learning involves metacognitive, motivational, and behavioral processes (Zimmerman, 1990).

    3. the difference between an expert learner and a novice learner
      1. they have more quantity of knowledge
      2. their knowledge is better organized and integrated
      3. they possess better strategies and methods
      4. they are better motivated and more self-regulated.
    1. 6 key principles of experts' knowledge

      1. experts notice features and manful patterns of info
      2. experts have abilities to make sense of the content based on prior knowledge that is organized in some ways
      3. experts' knowledge is not isolated and it related to context.
      4. experts have abilities to flexibly retrieve important aspects of their knowledge.
      5. experts may not have abilities to teach others
      6. experts have flexibilities in their approach to apply to new situations.