blech
Posted by ilanpillemer
| Announcements | Last Post | |
|---|---|---|
 |
SoC Curricula | 09/30/2017 01:08PM |
|
Demarcation or scoping of examinations and assessment | 02/13/2017 07:59AM |
|
School of Computing Short Learning Programmes | 11/24/2014 08:37AM |
|
Unisa contact information | 07/28/2011 01:28PM |
|
October 08, 2007 01:26PM |
|
October 08, 2007 02:22PM |
|
October 08, 2007 03:28PM |
Eish i spent so much time training a neural network.And the thing didn't come out 
Defn did not pass, maybe supped
Defn did not pass, maybe supped
|
October 08, 2007 04:54PM |
|
Re: blech October 08, 2007 06:00PM |
Well, it made sense in that given an hour and my textbook I would've solved it. 
Considering that I finished in 2h, if I had an idea of what cryptarithmetic was about I could've at least made a decent attempt on a solution... If they'd given us a queens problem or colouring problem I would've nailed the question, but I figured that cryptarithmetic wasn't important as the textbook only had a vague example.
Study guide should've said: all vague examples in the textbook will be in the exam. Then I could've supplemented my studies with google and actually had a fighting chance!
And now on to COS301, what fun.... I'd rather be building a 3d game engine instead....
Considering that I finished in 2h, if I had an idea of what cryptarithmetic was about I could've at least made a decent attempt on a solution... If they'd given us a queens problem or colouring problem I would've nailed the question, but I figured that cryptarithmetic wasn't important as the textbook only had a vague example.
Study guide should've said: all vague examples in the textbook will be in the exam. Then I could've supplemented my studies with google and actually had a fighting chance!
And now on to COS301, what fun.... I'd rather be building a 3d game engine instead....
|
Re: blech October 08, 2007 10:14PM |
Well, yeah, I studied really, hard, way more that everything else put together... And I'm sure I'm failing that one, or maybe just just past.
Q2, !?!?? -15
And seriously, I really worked on the CSPs, I could just not really figure cryptarithmetics out and thought, hey, only one fig on it... How do I wish now I googled that up...
Q7 was very weird for me. A hard question.
Now I just hope all that effort didn't sink the next 3 exams till 321 on tue
rattled? I'm floored.
Q2, !?!?? -15
And seriously, I really worked on the CSPs, I could just not really figure cryptarithmetics out and thought, hey, only one fig on it... How do I wish now I googled that up...
Q7 was very weird for me. A hard question.
Now I just hope all that effort didn't sink the next 3 exams till 321 on tue
rattled? I'm floored.
|
October 08, 2007 11:33PM |
well. look.
when the top students are rattled, floored, concerned - normally the marks get raised.
So lets just hope we are the top students.
Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem
when the top students are rattled, floored, concerned - normally the marks get raised.
So lets just hope we are the top students.
,= ,-_-. =.
((_/)o o(\_))
`-'(. .)`-'
\_/
http://ilanpillemer.com
Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem
|
October 09, 2007 08:03PM |
|
October 09, 2007 08:03PM |
|
October 09, 2007 08:24PM |
Dont think anyone is going to like the next comment:
Despite the fact that I didn't learn enough, I don't think the exam was unfair. The reason being, the most important aspects of the course was covered in the exam. The type of questions might have gotten us by surprise as we didn't do similar one's in the tut's (and in previous tut's they also were not covered - although that was a different text book).
Of course, nobody need to agree with me, and I'll most probably repeat this subject next year. Actually glad I got the exposure of the exam, would know better what to look out for next time!
Despite the fact that I didn't learn enough, I don't think the exam was unfair. The reason being, the most important aspects of the course was covered in the exam. The type of questions might have gotten us by surprise as we didn't do similar one's in the tut's (and in previous tut's they also were not covered - although that was a different text book).
Of course, nobody need to agree with me, and I'll most probably repeat this subject next year. Actually glad I got the exposure of the exam, would know better what to look out for next time!
|
Re: blech October 10, 2007 07:35AM |
If there is a next time I'm using the internet, because the book does not go into enough depth to answer these questions.
They could've given us something to do with decision tree learning rather than some odd probability question I've never seen, at least then it would've been more relevant to AI and the textbook. Or at least a hint in the tuts, "Hey guys, you might need to go into more depth on decision trees so read up on probabilities, etc. on the internet instead of just using the texbook, and sorry to the folks without internet access!"
They could've given us something to do with decision tree learning rather than some odd probability question I've never seen, at least then it would've been more relevant to AI and the textbook. Or at least a hint in the tuts, "Hey guys, you might need to go into more depth on decision trees so read up on probabilities, etc. on the internet instead of just using the texbook, and sorry to the folks without internet access!"
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.