IEEEE CCECE 2014 and Cognitive Agent Simulation

This past week I attended IEEE Canadian Conference on Electrical and Computer Engineering (CCECE2014) in Toronto, Canada. I was there because of two papers I was a co-author on. The work was part of a side project I was involved in on cognitive agent simulation. The idea was inspired by the observation that in the spring time, many newborn animals are struck as they cross the street. Later in the year, it seems that fewer animals meet this fate. So have the animals which survived observed the doomed creates being struck, learned something about the environment, and managed to become more intelligent? We aimed to model this type of environment, and then re-create the most basic intelligence to try to replicate this behaviour with a cognitive agent.

I was responsible for implementing the simulation tool and the naiive learning algorithm which we also presented at the conference. The simulator was created in c/c++ and was designed in such a way that later on the intelligence algorithms could be swapped out, so that we could also experiment with more sophisticated learning algorithms.

(more…)

Technical Reviewing as Grad Student?

As I’ve published more and more, I’ve been invited to become a reviewer for many conferences and journals. Some are by people I’ve met while presenting at conferences, but others come randomly in my inbox from people who have read my papers. There’s something that seems weird about being an “expert reviewer” while still not completed my studies myself – but I’ve always accepted when I’ve had time to do them because I feel like it’s good to volunteer back some time after other people have done the same work to review my papers.

Generally, I stick to accepting review requests for papers which are very closely related to my area of study. In the cases where I’m not sure of something, I ask for advice from other grad students in the areas I am lacking in expertise. I also usually give a comment to the editor letting them know I am just a PhD student, and to take my opinion with less weight than more qualified reviewers. That being said, I think I usually am thorough and give useful feedback to the authors’ of papers I review.

Getting invited to review so often has also made me question the whole review and acceptance process. It would be nice if journals and conferences disclosed how many of the reviewers have PhDs – although I guess it wouldn’t really tell much because I’ve also been handed papers by professors I work with and been told to review them and give them a report which I assume they use to submit the review themselves. In some respects it makes sense to have grad students review papers since they are often very connected to the current research, but I am still not confident about the process if it is possible for papers to be accepted without even being looked at by a real PhD. Maybe I just don’t know enough about how it all works yet to know for sure. After all, there’s always layers of editors and committees and everything else.

In any event, here’s a couple of links about how to review a paper for any other grad students who find themselves in the same boat:
http://www.cs.ucsb.edu/~ebelding/courses/284/papers/ReviewingPapersStudentGuide.html
http://www.raulpacheco.org/2013/06/the-ethics-of-academic-peer-review-some-tips-and-best-practices/

COCOA 2008 Paper

Just a small update, my first conference paper “Algorithms and Implementation for Interconnection Graph Problem” by Hongbing Fan, Christian Hundt, Yu-Liang Wu and myself, will be presented at COCOA 2008 in St. John’s Newfoundland on Friday, August 22nd at 9:40am by Dr. Fan. I am unable to attend since I am quite busy working on my thesis and other work. You can view the program for the rest of the conference at the COCOA website