Evonne is the Director of Research Training for the Creative Industries Faculty at Queensland University of Technology in Brisbane, Australia. She detests meetings and leans towards the hands-off supervision style, but her students will attest that she is passionate about their research and does yell at them (kindly) when needed.
Whether it is art, science or a little bit of magic, choosing the ‘right’ phd supervisor is one of the most important decisions you will make. There is no doubt that a little bit of luck (or magic) is involved, and both…
Juicero’s flagship product is a $699 countertop device that cold presses juice out of “packs” of already prepped fruit and veggies. The packs — reminiscent of the cups and pouches used in single-cup coffee brewers from Keurig, Flavia or Nespresso — cost $4 to $10 each and are available through a Juicero subscription, but not in groceries.
Juicero just picked up $70 million in Series B funding. ‘Cause digital.
We hope you can spare a few minutes to share with us the key recommendations you would give to PhD students that have not yet had successful submissions to top software engineering conferences, such as ICSE.
An interesting request, and I certainly look forward to receive some of the advice my fellow researchers will be providing you can see the advice of my fellow researchers in a presentation by Alex Orso.
When working with my students on papers, I must admit I sometimes repeat myself. Below are some of the things I hear myself say most often.
The aim of the doctoral symposium is to give PhD students the opportunity to present their research to receive constructive feedback from a panel of senior researchers in a specific area. The doctoral symposium is run in a highly interactive with a workshop format. Aiming to obtain maximum benefit from doctoral symposium, students should consider participating after they have settled on a research topic, with a defined problem statement and some ideas about the solution that they want to discuss.
“Do you have any previous experiences with Doctoral Symposium? Share with us!!”
Objetives of Doctoral Symposium
Present their research work in a relaxed and supportive environment;
Receive feedback and suggestions from peers and experienced faculty;
Gain an overview of the breadth and depth of research;
Obtain insight into directions for research taken by other doctoral candidates;
Discuss concerns about research, supervision, the job market, and other issues;
I have studied years ago about Systematic Review and Qualitative Research during my master degree. You can read a diversity of material about these in the technical reports, articles and books, which explain how to conduct, how to extract data, but a little focusing about how to analyze and synthetize the data. So, the big question is: How we can analyze the qualitative data? [my question now during the PhD]
What kind of method do you prefer? What the difference about the existing methods?
I always listening my teachers saying that to conduct a qualitative research, the better methods to analyze data are Grounded Theory or Thematic Analysis. But, what is a Thematic analysis? What is a Grounded Theory?
Existing in the literature many materials about it, but for the Computer Science I recommend to read:
PPOOA – Processes Pipelines in Object Oriented Architectures [website]
Provides a collection of building elements and an architecting process to build component-based architectures, taking into account concurrency issues earlier in the development.
PPOOA is an architecting framework oriented to real-time systems architectures. PPOOA uses two viewpoints: structural, using UML class diagrams extended with PPOOA stereotypes, and behavioral, supported by UML activity diagrams. PPOOA architectures may be evaluated by analytical methods such as RMA (Rate Monotonic Analysis) and simulation tools such as Cheddar tool. An architecting methodology (ise&ppooa) and process is provided also.
TRAK provides a means of describing the architecture of systems, based on the requirements of ISO/IEC/IEEE 42010. Domain-neutral. General purpose for the description of systems, aimed at systems engineers.
TRAK is based on MODAF (UK Ministry of Defence Architecture Framework). It was developed for rail but is domain agnostic and can be used wherever there is a system to be described. TRAK has been designed from the outset to conform to ISO/IEC 42010.
It has 5 perspectives and 22 architecture viewpoints. Architecture view content is defined using tuples (object – relationship – object) with additional rules to enforce consistency across an architecture description, based on a metamodel.
Siemens Four Views
The Siemens approach uses four views to document an architecture. The four views and their associated design tasks are shown in the Figure below. The first task for each view is global analysis. The second and third groups of tasks are the central and final design tasks , which define the elements of the architecture view, the relationships among them, and important properties.
DODAF – US Department of Defense Architecture Framework [website]
To enable “the development of architectures to facilitate the ability of Department of Defense (DoD) managers at all levels to make key decisions more effectively through organized information sharing across the Department, Joint Capability Areas (JCAs), Mission, Component, and Program boundaries.”
IBM IFW – Information Framework
The IFW is a set of banking specific business models that represent practice in banking. It comprises: (1)Information Models: providing banking data content to address areas such as enterprise-wide view of information; (2) Process Models: providing banking business processes content to address areas such as business process re-engineering; and, (3) Integration Models: providing business services content to address areas such as services oriented architectures.
The IFW business models are created by identifying, describing and structuring all of the business functions, data and processes.
When teaching software architecture it is hard to strike the right balance between practice (learning how to work with real systems and painful trade offs) and theory (general solutions that any architect needs to thoroughly understand).
To address this, we decided to try something radically different at Delft University of Technology:
To make the course as realistic as possible, we based the entire course on GitHub. Thus, teams of 3-4 students had to adopt an active open source GitHub project and contribute. And, in the style of “How GitHub uses GitHub to Build GitHub“, all communication within the course, among team members, and with external stakeholders took place through GitHub where possible.
Furthermore, to ensure that students actually digested architectural theory, we made them apply the theory to the actual project they picked. As sources we…