?

Log in

No account? Create an account
Lindsey Kuper [entries|archive|friends|userinfo]
Lindsey Kuper

[ website | composition.al ]
[ userinfo | livejournal userinfo ]
[ archive | journal archive ]

Things I need to internalize by March or so [Oct. 23rd, 2010|08:34 pm]
Lindsey Kuper
[Tags|, ]

So how does this look for an oral quals reading list? The idea of the list is to cover "the larger concepts and issues" of my research area, as well as to convey what I've been doing for the last two years. I've read most of them already, but "read once" is a long way from "internalized".

Oh, and:

  • TaPL, like, all of it
  • The first (Substructural Type Systems) and second (Dependent Types) chapters of ATTaPL

I also want to include some kind of standard reference on unification that's not specific to any particular language or system. Maybe this? I read a few things about unification last year as part of our unsuccessful FLOPS paper effort, but I never actually read Martelli and Montanari and probably ought to. Any suggestions?

Oh! And I'm going to have to know something about denotational semantics -- can anyone suggest a single standard reference for that?

Any other glaring omissions?

LinkReply

Comments:
From: simrob
2010-10-24 01:25 am (UTC)
So disclaimer the closest I ever came to taking a qual was when Aquinas, one of Andrew Appel's students, taught me TAPL as part of his quals preparation. So I don't actually know how this works.

Chris, do you recall how this unification paper went? For some reason I'm having trouble paging it back in and I'm off campus. Unification is also covered in the "Type Inference in Context" paper by McBride etc which I understood much better after I rewrote it twice.

Also, what are you looking to get out of the Substructural Type Systems paper? (First thought) In my recollection it's alright at explaining substructural type systems, but not really at giving a feel for substructural logic. (After browsing the Google Books non-redacted part) Actually, I think my thought is more that, there are so many paths through this subject, and I don't know if the particular path Dave Walker chose is the one I find most interesting. Another alternative would be Dave Walker and Limin Jia's joint papers (ILC: A Foundation for Automated Reasoning About Pointer Programs, in my case, is bright glowing red on my papers-to-read queue).
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: lindseykuper
2010-10-24 03:05 am (UTC)
Ooh, that's a good idea -- I need someone to teach TaPL to! Who can I get?

So at CMU do you not have quals as such?

What I'm looking to get out of the Substructural Type Systems chapter is to be able to hold up my end of a conversation with Amal about linear and affine types and suchlike.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
From: simrob
2010-10-24 04:39 am (UTC)
At CMU we do not have quals as such. I guess the ATAPL chapter is right on target if what you're actually interested in is substructural type systems, so whoo :).
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: lindseykuper
2010-10-24 06:07 am (UTC)
I love how you guys do things. The upsetting thing that I notice about the quals process, now that I'm getting close to the end of it -- and I'm not talking about IU specifically here, but about quals as they are at a lot of schools -- is that quals are kind of like "Okay, now that you've been in grad school for years, now you have official permission to conduct real research in your field." Before that, you were presumably only supposed to be doing "exploratory" research, or something. At CMU it appears to be more like "If you are not doing real research from day one, what the hell is wrong with you? Stop taking classes."
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
From: simrob
2010-10-24 06:22 am (UTC)
I think this is true. On the other hand, in my retrospect I think I could have used an excuse, maybe around year 2, when I was told "okay, research is not your primary job for just a month or two. figure out what you still need to know. learn it." You won't have an excuse after this point in time.

Because as it is, a lot of us have a bumbly moment where we realize oh shit I need to know this and I don't and here's me getting called out on the floor. And then I think the idea is you figure it out. Quals, in that respect, are actually a bit of a nice safety net, but that is an aspect of quals that is disconnected from the idea that what you're doing is qualifying.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
(Deleted comment)
[User Picture]From: lindseykuper
2010-10-24 08:29 pm (UTC)
*applauds*
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)