So I'm finally getting around to writing my first entry. I think my impression of the course so far has been great. Nearing the end of CSC165 as things got more and more difficult I've dreaded coming into 236. I'm honestly not a big fan of proving things. I can enjoy and appreciate a good proof but I usually take forever to get through them. My method was usually looking through as many examples as possible until nothing would surprise me. Maybe taking more time to prove things without answers may be more effective.
A1:
My first major difficulty was on number 3 in assignment 1. I saw the relationship between between the number of 3-subsets for n-elements then for n+1 elements but I couldn't make the jump to relating it to the formula for the number of 2-subsets in n + 2 elements. I even drew out samples for my self to examine. Finally finishing your proof but finding out your obstacle was so small can be so bitter sweet.
Midterm:
When the midterm neared I was a bit worried due to the few examples we had to work with regarding well-ordering and structural induction. I was surprised to see that we were given only 3 proofs that involved neither. The first questions regarding sums practically wrote itself and the second was similar enough to the ternary tree question on assignment 1. Unfortunately I ran out of time to finish the last question which was about Fibonacci numbers, I'll have to mess around with those some more to be quicker.
What now:
Well right after our midterm we had an hour of lecture on time complexity, big O, etc. I'd say it's been our most confusing lecture yet. It's been about a year since I last did time complexity so I'll have to do some serious reviewing the 165 notes this week.
No comments:
Post a Comment