Search Results

Search found 17124 results on 685 pages for 'learning tool'.

Page 7/685 | < Previous Page | 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14  | Next Page >

  • What Languages are mostly understood "intuitively" and could benefit from a more formal learning approach?

    - by keppla
    In a presentation, i stumbled upon the Statement "JavaScript is a Language everybody uses, yet nearly noone seems to find it neccessary to learn how it works". And indeed, not many of the programmers i know could explain javascript's prototype concept, or why functions need to be 'bound' to this. CSS seems to be another example of this behaviour: everyone knows how to put a 'class' to an element, and to write a style .myclass { ... }, but only a few even know of margin-collapse. My question is: are there more of those languages, technologies, concepts, that are so prevalent that we dont even notice them as something worth learning while we use them?

    Read the article

  • Learning WPF and MVVM - best approach for learning from scratch

    - by bplus
    Hello, I've got about three years c# experience. I'd like to learn some WPF and the MVVM pattern. There are a lot of links to articles on this site but I'm getting a little overwhelmed. Would a sensible approach for a begginer to be forget mvvm for a while and just quickly learn a bit a of WPF, then come back to MVVM? I had a leaf through this book in work today, it doesn't seem to mention MVVM (at least not in the index). I was pretty surprised by this as I thought MVVM was supposed to be the "lingua franca" of WPF? Also I've just started working at a new company and they are using MVVM with WinForms, has anyone come across this before? Can anyone recommend a book that will teach me both WPF and MVVM?

    Read the article

  • Design for a machine learning artificial intelligence framework

    - by Lirik
    This is a community wiki which aims to provide a good design for a machine learning/artificial intelligence framework (ML/AI framework). Please contribute to the design of a language-agnostic framework which would allow multiple ML/AI algorithms to be plugged into a single framework which: runs the algorithms with a user-specified data set. facilitates learning, qualification, and classification. allows users to easily plug in new algorithms. can aggregate or create an ensemble of the existing algorithms. can save/load the progress of the algorithm (i.e. save the network and weights of a neural network, save the tree of a decision tree, etc.). What is a good design for this sort of ML/AI framework?

    Read the article

  • Design for a machine learning artificial intelligence framework (community wiki)

    - by Lirik
    This is a community wiki which aims to provide a good design for a machine learning/artificial intelligence framework (ML/AI framework). Please contribute to the design of a language-agnostic framework which would allow multiple ML/AI algorithms to be plugged into a single framework which: runs the algorithms with a user-specified data set. facilitates learning, qualification, and classification. allows users to easily plug in new algorithms. can aggregate or create an ensemble of the existing algorithms. can save/load the progress of the algorithm (i.e. save the network and weights of a neural network, save the tree of a decision tree, etc.). What is a good design for this sort of ML/AI framework?

    Read the article

  • Algorithm and data structure learning resources for dynamic programming

    - by Pranav
    Im learning dynamic programming now, and while I know the theory well, designing DP algorithms for new problems is still difficult. This is what i would really like now- A book or a website, which poses a problem which can be solved by dynamic programming. Also there is the solution with an explanation available, which i would like to see if i cant solve the problem even after butting my head at it for a few hours. Is there some resource that provides this sort of a thing for several categories of algorithms- like graph algorithms, dynamic programming, etc? P.S. I considered Topcoder, but the solutions there are not really appropriate for learning to implement efficient solutions.

    Read the article

  • What learning habits can you suggest?

    - by Asaf R
    Hi, Our profession often requires deep learning; sitting down and reading, and understanding. I'm currently undergoing an exam period, and I'm looking for ways to learn more effectively. I'm not asking about what to learn, or whether to prefer blogs over books, etc. My question is much more physical than that - What do you do when need to study, and I mean study hard? I'm looking for answers such as I slice my time to 2.5 hours intervals and make a break between them, but never during. I keep a jar of water nearby. I wake up at 6 o'clock sharp and start my day with a session at the gym. What good learning habits did acquire, or wish you had acquired? (I know this isn't strictly programming related, but it is programmers related)

    Read the article

  • Machine Learning Algorithm for Peer-to-Peer Nodes

    - by FreshCode
    I want to apply machine learning to a classification problem in a parallel environment. Several independent nodes, each with multiple on/off sensors, can communicate their sensor data with the goal of classifying an event as defined by a heuristic, training data or both. Each peer will be measuring the same data from their unique perspective and will attempt to classify the result while taking into account that any neighbouring node (or its sensors or just the connection to the node) could be faulty. Nodes should function as equal peers and determine the most likely classification by communicating their results. Ultimately each node should make a decision based on their own sensor data and their peers' data. If it matters, false positives are OK for certain classifications (albeit undesirable) but false negatives would be totally unacceptable. Given that each final classification will receive good or bad feedback, what would be an appropriate machine learning algorithm to approach this problem with if the nodes could communicate with each other to determine the most likely classification?

    Read the article

  • Machine Learning Algorithm for Parallel Nodes

    - by FreshCode
    I want to apply machine learning to a classification problem in a parallel environment. Several independent nodes, each with multiple on/off sensors, can communicate their sensor data with the goal of classifying an event defined by a heuristic, training data or both. Each peer will be measuring the same data from their unique perspective and will attempt to classify the result while taking into account that any neighbouring node (or its sensors or just the connection to the node) could be faulty. Nodes should function as equal peers and determine the most likely classification by communicating their results. Ultimately each node should make a decision based on their own sensor data and their peers' data. If it matters, false positives are OK (albeit undesirable) but false negatives are totally unacceptable. Given that each final classification will receive good or bad feedback, what would be an appropriate machine learning algorithm to approach this problem with if the nodes could communicate with each other to determine the most likely classification?

    Read the article

  • Does it ever make sense to license source code as a learning resource under GPL?

    - by Earlz
    I recently came across a series of articles walking through how to make a scheme interpreter. I was browsing through the code when I realized that it was AGPL. For the most part, the code itself is the teaching tool. Basically, the code as-is is what I need, however, I did want to understand how it all fits together as well. I realized though that if I copy and paste a single line of code, my project would become AGPL. Possibly by even more trivial actions? Anyway, is this a standard practice at all? Am I just being over-paranoid? Also, what benefits are there to this licensing scheme?

    Read the article

  • PHP MVC Learning Suggestions

    - by Noah Goodrich
    Can someone recommend some good resources for learning about MVC in PHP? It doesn't have to be specific to MVC in PHP. In fact, I'm looking for recommendations of materials that focus on the higher level concepts with examples that could port well to any language so even ASP.net books will be tolerated ;-) Any recommendations for books, websites, blogs, etc would be excellent. UPDATE: I have reviewed the MVC Learning Resources post but all of the references there seemed to be ASP.net specific. I was hoping to gather suggestions that were broader than a single language.

    Read the article

  • Hebbian learning

    - by Bane
    I have asked another question on Hebbian learning before, and I guess I got a good answer which I accepted, but, the problem is that I now realize that I've mistaken about Hebbian learning completely, and that I'm a bit confused. So, could you please explain how it can be useful, and what for? Because the way Wikipedia and some other pages describe it - it doesn't make sense! Why would we want to keep increasing the weight between the input and the output neuron if the fire together? What kind of problems can it be used to solve, because when I simulate it in my head, it certainly can't do the basic AND, OR, and other operations (say you initialize the weights at zero, the output neurons never fire, and the weights are never increased!)

    Read the article

  • Less Mathematical Approaches to Machine Learning?

    - by Ed
    Out of curiosity, I've been reading up a bit on the field of Machine Learning, and I'm surprised at the amount of computation and mathematics involved. One book I'm reading through uses advanced concepts such as Ring Theory and PDEs (note: the only thing I know about PDEs is that they use that funny looking character). This strikes me as odd considering that mathematics itself is a hard thing to "learn." Are there any branches of Machine Learning that use different approaches? I would think that a approaches relying more on logic, memory, construction of unfounded assumptions, and over-generalizations would be a better way to go, since that seems more like the way animals think. Animals don't (explicitly) calculate probabilities and statistics; at least as far as I know.

    Read the article

  • What are your suggestions on learning how to think?

    - by Jonathan Khoo
    First of all, this is not the generic 'make me a better programmer' question, even though the outcome of asking this question might seem similar to it. On programmers.SE, I've read and seen these get closed here, here, here, here, and here. We all know there are a multitude of generic suggestions to hone your programming skills (e.g reading SO, reading recommended books, following blogs, getting involved in open-source projects, etc.). This is not what I'm after. I also acknowledge the active readership on this web site and am hoping it works in my favour by yielding some great answers. From reading correspondence here, there appears to be a vast number of experienced people who are working, or have worked, programming-related fields. And most of you can convey thoughts in an eloquent, concise manner. I've recently noticed the distinction between someone who's capable of programming and a programmer who can really think. I refuse to believe that in order to become great at programmer, we simply submit ourselves to a lifetime of sponge-like behaviour (i.e absorb everything related to our field by reading, listening, watching, etc.). I would even state that simply knowing every single programming concept that allows you to solve problem X faster than everyone around you, if you can't think, you're enormously limiting yourself - you're just a fast robot. I like to believe there's a whole other face of being a great programmer which is unrelated to how much you know about programming, but it is how well you can intertwine new concepts and apply them to your programming profession or hobby. I haven't seen anyone delve into, or address, this facet of the human mind and programming. (Yes, it's also possible that I haven't looked hard enough too - sorry if that's the case.) So for anyone who has spent any time thinking about what I've mentioned above - or maybe it's everyone here because I'm a little behind in my personal/professional development - what are your suggestions on learning how to think? Aside from the usual reading, what else have you done to be better than the other people in your/our field?

    Read the article

  • Developing wheel reinventing tendencies into a skill as opposed to reluctantly learning wheel-finding skills? [duplicate]

    - by Korey Hinton
    This question already has an answer here: Is reinventing the wheel really all that bad? 20 answers I am more of a high-level wheel reinventor. I definitely prefer to make use of existing API features built into a language and popular third-party frameworks that I know can solve the problem, however when I have a particular problem that I feel capable of solving within a reasonable time I am very reluctant to find someone else's solution. Here are a few reasons why I reinvent: It takes time to learn a new API API restrictions might exist that I don't know about Avoiding re-work of unfamiliar code I am conflicted between doing what I know and shifting to a new technique I don't feel comfortable with. On one hand I feel like following my instincts and getting really good at solving problems, especially ones that I would never challenge myself with if all I did was try to find answers. And on the other hand I feel like I might be missing out on important skills like saving time by finding the right framework and expanding my knowledge by learning how to use a new framework. I guess my question comes down to this: My current attitude is to stick to the built-in API and APIs I know well* and to not spend my time searching github for a solution to a problem I know I can solve myself within a reasonable amount of time. Is that a reasonable balance for a successful programmer? *Obviously I will still look around for new frameworks that save time and solve/simplify difficult problems.

    Read the article

  • Learning a new concept - write from scratch or use frameworks?

    - by Stu
    I have recently been trying to learn about MVVM and all of the associated concepts such as repositories, mediators, data access. I made a decision that I would not use any frameworks for this so that I could gain a better understanding of how everything worked. I’m beginning to wonder if that was the best idea because I have hit some problems which I am not able to solve, even with the help of Stack Overflow! Writing from scratch I still feel that you have a much better understanding of something when you have been in the guts of it than if you were at a higher level. The other side of that coin is that you are in the guts of something that you don't fully understand which will lead to bad design decisions. This then makes it hard to get help because you will create unusual scenarios which are less likely to occur when you working within the confines of a framework. I have found that there are plenty of tutorials on the basics of a concept but very few that take you all the way from novice to expert. Maybe I should be looking at a book for this? Using frameworks The biggest motivation for me to use frameworks is that they are much more likely to be used in the workplace than a custom rolled solution. This can be quite a benefit when starting a new job if it's one less thing you have to learn. I feel that there is much better support for a framework than a custom solution which makes sense; many more people are using the framework than the solution that you created. The level of help is much wider as well, from basic questions to really specific, detailed questions. I would be interested to hear other people's views on this. When you are learning something new, should you/do you use frameworks or not? Why? If it's a combination of both, when do you stop one and move on to the other?

    Read the article

  • How should an undergraduate programmer organize his time learning the maximum possible?

    - by nischayn22
    I started programming lately(pre-final year of a CS degree) and now feel like there's a sea of uncovered treasure for me out there. So, I decided to cover as much as is possible before I look out for a job after graduation. So, I started to read books (The C++ Programming Language, Introduction to Algorithms, Cracking the Coding Interview, Programming Pearls,etc ) participate in StackExchange sites, solving problems (InterviewStreet and ProjectEuler), coding for open source, chatting to fellow programmers/mentors and try to learn more and more. Good,then what's the problem?? The problem is I am trying to do many things, but I am doubtful that I am still utilizing my time properly. I am reading many books and sometimes I just leave a book halfway (jumping from one book to another), sometimes I spend way too much time on chatting and also in getting lost somewhere in the huge internet world, and lastly the wasteful burden of attending classes (I don't think my teachers know good enough or I prefer learning on my own) May be some of you had similar situation. How did you organize your time? Or what do you think is the best way to organize it for an undergraduate? Also what mistakes am I making that you can warn me of

    Read the article

  • Agile: User Stories for Machine Learning Project?

    - by benjismith
    I've just finished up with a prototype implementation of a supervised learning algorithm, automatically assigning categorical tags to all the items in our company database (roughly 5 million items). The results look good, and I've been given the go-ahead to plan the production implementation project. I've done this kind of work before, so I know how the functional components of the software. I need a collection of web crawlers to fetch data. I need to extract features from the crawled documents. Those documents need to be segregated into a "training set" and a "classification set", and feature-vectors need to be extracted from each document. Those feature vectors are self-organized into clusters, and the clusters are passed through a series of rebalancing operations. Etc etc etc etc. So I put together a plan, with about 30 unique development/deployment tasks, each with time estimates. The first stage of development -- ignoring some advanced features that we'd like to have in the long-term, but aren't high enough priority to make it into the development schedule yet -- is slated for about two months worth of work. (Keep in mind that I already have a working prototype, so the final implementation is significantly simpler than if the project was starting from scratch.) My manager said the plan looked good to him, but he asked if I could reorganize the tasks into user stories, for a few reasons: (1) our project management software is totally organized around user stories; (2) all of our scheduling is based on fitting entire user stories into sprints, rather than individually scheduling tasks; (3) other teams -- like the web developers -- have made great use of agile methodologies, and they've benefited from modelling all the software features as user stories. So I created a user story at the top level of the project: As a user of the system, I want to search for items by category, so that I can easily find the most relevant items within a huge, complex database. Or maybe a better top-level story for this feature would be: As a content editor, I want to automatically create categorical designations for the items in our database, so that customers can easily find high-value data within our huge, complex database. But that's not the real problem. The tricky part, for me, is figuring out how to create subordinate user stories for the rest of the machine learning architecture. Case in point... I know that the algorithm requires two major architectural subdivisions: (A) training, and (B) classification. And I know that the training portion of the architecture requires construction of a cluster-space. All the Agile Development literature I've read seems to indicate that a user story should be the "smallest possible implementation that provides any business value". And that makes a lot of sense when designing a piece of end-user software. Start small, and then incrementally add value when users demand additional functionality. But a cluster-space, in and of itself, provides zero business value. Nor does a crawler, or a feature-extractor. There's no business value (not for the end-user, or for any of the roles internal to the company) in a partial system. A trained cluster-space is only possible with the crawler and feature extractor, and only relevant if we also develop an accompanying classifier. I suppose it would be possible to create user stories where the subordinate components of the system act as the users in the stories: As a supervised-learning cluster-space construction routine, I want to consume data from a feature extractor, so that I can exist. But that seems really weird. What benefit does it provide me as the developer (or our users, or any other stakeholders, for that matter) to model my user stories like that? Although the main story can be easily divided along architectural-component boundaries (crawler, trainer, classifier, etc), I can't think of any useful decomposition from a user's perspective. What do you guys think? How do you plan Agile user stories for sophisticated, indivisible, non-user-facing components?

    Read the article

  • Hudson.. another Continuous Integration tool

    - by Narendra Tiwari
    In my previous posts I discussed about Cruisecontrol.net and its legacy support to .Net development. Hudson  is yet another continuous integration tool. Hudson is also free like CCNet and built in java. - CCNet has its legacy support to .Net applications where as Hudson can be easily configured on both the environments (.Net and Java). - One of the major differences in CCNet and Hudson is the richer GUI of Hudson provide user interactive screens for project configuration where as in CCNet we have to play with a few xml configuration files. Both the tools are capable of providing basic features of continuous integration e.g.:- - Source Control configuration - Code Compilation/Build - Ad hoc plugin tools to be configured along with compilation Support for adhoc tools seems to be bigger with CCNet e.g. There are almost every source control plugin available with CCNet where as Hudson has support for limited source control servers. Basically there is an interseting point to see is that there are 2 major partsof whole CI system one performed by build tool and rest. Build tool takes care of all adhoc plugin tools  so no matter if CI tool does not have plugin for that tool if thet tools provides command line support that can be configured in build tool and that build tool is then configured with CI tool inturn. For example if I have a build script configured in MSBuild and CCNet can be easily switched to Hudson. Here we need not to change anything in build script we just need to configure MSBuild on Hudson and pass the path of script file and thats it... all is same. Hudson Resources:- - https://hudson.dev.java.net/ - http://wiki.hudson-ci.org/display/HUDSON/Meet+Hudson - http://wiki.hudson-ci.org/display/HUDSON/Plugins - http://callport.blogspot.com/2009/02/hudson-for-net-projects.html Java support on CCNet http://confluence.public.thoughtworks.org/display/CC/Getting+Started+With+CruiseControl?focusedCommentId=19988484#comment-19988484 Please share your thoughts...

    Read the article

  • VS 11 Beta merge tool is awesome, except for resovling conflicts

    - by deadlydog
    If you've downloaded the new VS 11 Beta and done any merging, then you've probably seen the new diff and merge tools built into VS 11.  They are awesome, and by far a vast improvement over the ones included in VS 2010.  There is one problem with the merge tool though, and in my opinion it is huge.Basically the problem with the new VS 11 Beta merge tool is that when you are resolving conflicts after performing a merge, you cannot tell what changes were made in each file where the code is conflicting.  Was the conflicting code added, deleted, or modified in the source and target branches?  I don't know (without explicitly opening up the history of both the source and target files), and the merge tool doesn't tell me.  In my opinion this is a huge fail on the part of the designers/developers of the merge tool, as it actually forces me to either spend an extra minute for every conflict to view the source and target file history, or to go back to use the merge tool in VS 2010 to properly assess which changes I should take.I submitted this as a bug to Microsoft, but they say that this is intentional by design. WHAT?! So they purposely crippled their tool in order to make it pretty and keep the look consistent with the new diff tool?  That's like purposely putting a little hole in the bottom of your cup for design reasons to make it look cool.  Sure, the cup looks cool, but I'm not going to use it if it leaks all over the place and doesn't do the job that it is intended for. Bah! but I digress.Because this bug is apparently a feature, they asked me to open up a "feature request" to have the problem fixed. Please go vote up both my bug submission and the feature request so that this tool will actually be useful by the time the final VS 11 product is released.

    Read the article

  • Can aptitude for learning Programming paradigms be influenced by culture or native language's gramma

    - by DVK
    It is well known that different people have different aptitudes regarding various programming paradigms (e.g. some people have trouble learning non-procedural, especially functional languages. Some people have trouble understanding pointers - see Joel Spolsky's blog for musings on that. Some people have trouble grasping recursion). I was recently reading about a study that looked at how the grammar of someone's native language affected their speed of learning math. Can't find that article now but a quick googling found this reference. That led me to wondering whether someone's native culture or first language might affect their aptitude towards various programming paradigms. I'm more curious about positive influences - e.g. some trait that make it easier/faster for someone to learn a particular paradigm, for example native language grammar being very recursion-oriented. To be clear, I'm looking for how culture/language grammare may affect the difference between aptitude of the same person towards various paradigms as opposed to how it affects overall aptitude towards programming between different persons. Important: the only answers I'm interested in are either references to scientific studies, or personal observations from someone intimately familiar with a particular culture/language, including from their own experience. E.g. I'm not interested in your opinion of how Chinese being your first language affects anything unless you speak Chinese or worked with extremely large set of Chinese-native programmers extensively. I'm OK with your guesstimates not based on scientific studies, but please be sure to supply your reasoning about plausible causes of your observation. I'm not interested in culture-bashing (any such commends will be deleted or flagged for deletion). I'm also not particularly interested in culture-building - we all know Linus is from Finland and Tetris was written in Russia and Larry Wall is an American. Any culture/nation can produce a brilliant mind in any discipline. I'm interested in averages.

    Read the article

  • Is learning C++ a good idea?

    - by chang
    The more I hear and read about C++ (e.g. this: http://lwn.net/Articles/249460/), I get the impression, that I'd waste my time learning C++. I some wrote network routing algorithm in C++ for a simulator, and it was a pain (as expected, especially coming from a perl/python/Java background ...). I'm never happy about giving up on some technology, but I would be happy, if I could limit my knowledge of C-family languages to just C, C# and Objective-C (even OS Xs Cocoa, which is huge and takes a lot of time to learn looks like joy compared to C++ ...). Do I need to consider myself dumb or unwilling, just because I'm not partial to the pain involved learning this stuff? Technologies advance and there will be options other than C++, when deciding on implementation languages, or not? And for speed: If speed were that critical, I'd go for a plain C implementation instead, or write C extensions for much more productive languages like ruby or python ... The one-line version of the above: Will C++ stay such a relevant language that every committed programmer should be familiar with it? [ edit / thank you very much for your interesting and useful answers so far .. ] [ edit / .. i am accepting the top-rated answer; thanks again for all answers! ]

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14  | Next Page >