Confessions of a researchaholic

2016-04-12

Research coherence

Filed under: Real — liyiwei @ 7:31 pm
Tags: ,

One common advice on research is to have a coherent theme among our papers. I heard this from a bigwig around 2003 after getting my PhD.

This is one of these advices that I agree in principle but have violated in practice.
=D

Yes, coherence can help recognition from the community, especially when one enters a new field.

However, I am not sure if this should be intentionally aimed for. Unless you are extremely smart and versatile, you are likely end up doing related stuff without even trying.

There is this implicit force that drags us towards similar, and thus incremental, ideas. We should fight against this force, not follow it.
So, just do whatever you like. You will have more fun and more likely to produce novel stuff which, even if lacks coherence, beats being incremental.

2016-04-09

How to design talk slides

Filed under: Real — liyiwei @ 11:57 pm
Tags: ,

Using slides is a popular way to give presentations. I am not sure if it is the best way, but things can go very badly if done in the wrong way.

Take a look at Jim Blinn’s post about giving presentations.
Below are some quick high level suggestions. (I plan to refine this post later.)

Aim for simplicity and minimalism.

The slides are for conveying information to your audience, not serving as memo for the speaker.

Use intuitive pictures, illustrations, and animations, instead of texts and (worse) equations.

If you find yourself worrying about typography, it is a sign of too much texts.
No sentence should run over one line.

Rid of visual clutters like bullet points.

Gratuitous colors and unnecessary font variations tend to confuse people.

2016-03-27

WYSIWYG editor

Filed under: Real — liyiwei @ 11:02 am
Tags:

Some people told me that they prefer Word over Latex for paper writing due to a more direct WYSIWYG interface.

It is true that using Latex is more like coding than writing. But is Word really more WYSIWYG?

One of my PhD students, J, is interning with a top HCI lab that prefers Word. J already has first-authored multiple SIGGRAPH papers via Latex, but had difficulty figuring out how to use Word, such as citations and cross references, even after the internship mentor provided a previous paper Word file for example.

The main problem of a binary file like Word is that it shows what is there but not how it got there.
Take citations as an example. Even starting with a complete paper, there is no way to tell how to add a new citation just by looking at the file alone. One has to search online or via the in app help.

In contrast, a source file like Latex shows how everything is done, even though we have to take an extra compilation step to see what it looks like. But that can be a single command with a makefile, which also clearly shows how to build everything.

The ideal tool should allow authoring in both directions: on the source (like Latex) with outcome immediately visible (like Word), or on the outcome (like Word) with the source automatically modified.
But for now, Latex is more WYSIWYG than Word for me.

2016-03-24

Recording and sharing presentation

Filed under: Real — liyiwei @ 9:43 am
Tags: ,

Talks are usually easier to understand than the corresponding papers. To get accepted, papers need to be written in a way that look formal and rigorous, but not necessarily easy to understand. However, when authors present their (accepted) papers, they tend to cut the chase and talk straight.

In the past, people have to attend conferences for the talks.
Nowadays, everyone can easily share their talk slides online.
Better yet, record and share your presentations as videos (e.g. via PowerPoint). This can be done during practices or official presentation.
You do practice your talks, right? So why not record during your rehearsals, so that you can review now and share later.
Recording in official presentation might be trickier, e.g. the conference may prefer presenters using a shared machine and the recording might disrupt your presentation, but can be worth a try.

I have not done this for my own talks, but realized it can be a good idea after watching a few recorded talks online. I really appreciate the efforts from the authors, and plan to do so for my future talks.

2016-03-11

Why it is fun to review journal papers

Filed under: Real — liyiwei @ 1:15 pm
Tags: , ,

After kindly agreeing to review a journal revision for the N-th time, the guy commented that “it’s the gift that keeps on giving!” 🙂

Conversation with collaborator X prior to a SIGGRAPH rebuttal

Filed under: Real — liyiwei @ 1:11 pm
Tags: ,

X: I’m really eager to see what the SIGGRAPH reviewers have in store for us this time… The suspense is killing me. =o

Li-Yi: I just assume they will screw me, and I am never disappointed. 🙂

X: Yes, that’s what I do as well, but I’m always amazed about how they always find ways to complain about the stuff you don’t expect. 😮

Li-Yi: If I can expect what others will think, I will be like some sort of x-men or superman. 🙂

2016-02-01

The cat experiment

Filed under: Real — liyiwei @ 11:07 am
Tags: , , ,

Once, when I was around 9 or 10, I was visiting my aunt’s place.

One of the cousins, X, and I were standing near the swimming pool. The family cat walked by. Cousin X and I got into the discussion about whether cats can swim. I have seen a few dogs and at least one horse swam, so I was pretty sure the answer is yes (cats seem more agile). Cousin X disagreed (he is older but not necessarily smarter), so we decided to have a bet.

Clearly, the only way to settle the bet is to experiment, so I grabbed the cat and threw it into the pool.
(That was before the age of YouTube and Google, BTW.)

What followed was amazing, and happened like within a few milliseconds. The cat sprang on the water surface like a trampoline, and immediate landed back near my feet. It was dripping, so it clearly fell into the water, but I had no idea how it managed to jump back. Meanwhile, our debate remained unsettled.

I am trying to come up with a very concrete way to tell a new PhD student how to decide whether someone is suitable for (scientific) research. So here is my try. Let me know if you have better ideas.

Do you like to ask questions that seem interesting at least to you (e.g. whether cats can swim)?

Do you enjoy finding the answers yourself through investigations and experiments (e.g. grab the cat and throw it into the pool, and observe what happens)?

Are you very comfortable with the consequences, regardless of the outcomes of the experiments (e.g. the cat neither swam nor sank and my aunt beat me up)?

Can you do this continuously as a career? Imagine it is Friday lunch time, and all the works you have done this week have turned out to be failures (e.g. no other ways you have tried can tell you whether cats can swim).
You have no idea what is going to happen this afternoon when you try your 101th experiment with that cat.

If you hesitate for any of these questions or you think I am crazy, you are probably not suitable for research. At least, you will not be happy or successful.

Talent and personality are important; you have to be sufficiently smart and tough for research. But passion is even more important; the only way to be truly happy and productive is to do what you really like.

2016-01-29

School versus job performance

Filed under: Real — liyiwei @ 4:29 pm
Tags: , ,

How predictive is the school performance for the eventual job (and life) performance of an individual?

This is a very important question. The schools are supposed to educate what is actually useful. (But clearly that is not the case in practice.)

This is also a very broad question under perennial discussion.

In my personal experiences on the creative side of computer science (e.g. research and development for the cutting edge of graphics and HCI), there is a weak positive correlation between school and job performance (around 0.2 to 0.3 if I have to be numeric).
Good school performance reflects positive traits such as talent and work ethics, but also negative traits such as conformity, lack of creativity, and risk aversion.

This is why standard statistics, like grades, schools, and rankings, are not enough and sometimes even misleading. We have to look at more practical evidence, such as publications, projects, and recommendations.

This is also why recruiting top students and employees is very challenging. Top schools and companies do have advantages in attracting top talents, but we only get what we look for. Many of the best people I have worked so far had been bypassed by the traditional screening standards. Conversely, I have also seen many weak people in top institutions.

Maybe one day data analysis and machine learning will solve this problem.
Before that, I rely on the good old way of people reading.

Research opening

Filed under: Real — liyiwei @ 12:53 pm
Tags: ,

February 22 2016 update: I managed to spend all the expiring grant money already.

I have several opening research positions. Please contact me if interested, and help spread the information.

What:
You pick whatever topic you like to do as long as (1) it can be published in a top graphics or HCI venue (e.g. SIGGRAPH, SIGGRAPH Asia, ToG, UIST, CHI), and (2) I have enough interests and expertise to help you.

How:
Send me a brief description of your research plans along with the usual information, like your resume. Tell me why you want to work with me and how I can help you.

When:
The first period will begin anytime from now and end on April 14 2016.
I can extend your contract if your performance is good enough.

Where:
These will be HKU positions, but other than school requirements you can work anywhere you like.

Who:
If you like to continue involve your current advisers or collaborators, just let me know. I usually like to know and collaborate with different people.

Why:
I have an expiring research grant that needs to be consumed prior to April 14 2016, and the remaining can be used only for hiring staff.

« Previous Page — Next Page »

Theme: Rubric. Get a free blog at WordPress.com