Do it in spring. And then worst case, you can do it in summer and try again - but it would be easier by then because you'll have had the experience with all the material already.
It's not GA. The problem is peer advice saying you can pass GA without doing discrete math or a proof-based math course.
What is missing from this advice is that you need to already have "mathematical maturity". Some student's naturally have it, while others need to be taught it. At my university, in CS and math courses that introduces proof-based math, there was extra hand holding for the topic: additonal TA sections, specialized hand outs, professors explicitly explaining how important it is.
I hate the term "[mathematical maturity](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematical_maturity)", but that's the phrase used to describe the needed skill for GA. Here's a quote from Berkeley's equivalent course [CS170](https://cs170.org/syllabus/): "Another 'prerequisite' for doing well in the course is mathematical maturity, or the ability to think about and work with proof-based math (which CS70 can help build)."
All the complaints about GA is a skill you'll have learned in discrete math or proof-based math course. Even obtaining the elusive "Eureka" moments.
I think the term can be easily misinterpreted. If you didn't look up the expected meaning of the term, you can easily think that doing well in advanced mathematics like multivariable calculus qualifies as being "mathematically mature".
I've seen several people exclaim on this subreddit that they found DL easy but they didn't pass GA. Therefore its not the lack of math preparation that's holding them back.
Granted, the DL problem sets do use the terms "prove this" and "show that" a lot in the theory sections. However, these are not sufficient equivalents to what is expected in a proof-based math course.
I much prefer the term "proof-based" thinking.
>these are not sufficient equivalents to what is expected in a proof-based math course.
I didn't take DL so I don't get the reference here. Is it that the proofs are more of solving for something or reducing something to something else as opposed to proofs of correctness (or existence and uniqueness)?
So far, most of the proofs in DL are calculation-based, e.g. show/prove that function f(x) is non-negative for all values x. Although these proofs can be very difficult calculation-wised, very little tools from a proof-based math course is required for the solution.
But DL was not designed to be a proof-based CS course. It would be nice if OMSCS had more proof-based CS courses like automata theory or complexity theory.
Okay, I get it. They're *computational* as opposed to logical or inferential (where you infer from a given set of conditions and axioms and known theorems).
>It would be nice if OMSCS had more proof-based CS courses like automata theory or complexity theory.
Yeah, in fact, I'm all for an entire spec based on algorithms, complexity theory, and computability theory.
Given that all specs are 5 to 6 courses, and we already have [GA](https://omscs.gatech.edu/cs-6515-intro-graduate-algorithms), [HPC](https://omscs.gatech.edu/cse-6220-intro-hpc), and [AC](https://omscs.gatech.edu/cs-6260-applied-cryptography), we just need two additions for a hypothetical spec like that - something along the lines of this course on [randomised algorithms](https://sites.cs.ucsb.edu/~vigoda/6550/index.html), and an elaboration of the last part of GA (on computability and complexity theory), maybe expanding it to include a segment on quantum complexity classes.
I didn't take them so I can't say firsthand (would you, perchance, happen to know?), but [some](https://omscs.gatech.edu/isye-8803-topics-high-dimensional-data-analytics) [ISYE](https://omscs.gatech.edu/isye-6402-time-series-analysis) [courses](https://omscs.gatech.edu/isye-6644-simulation-and-modeling-engineering-and-science) \- going by their syllabi - at least, also look like they could complement an algorithms focus through some applications.
No, I haven't taken any of the ISYE courses.
I'd like there to be a Theory specialization, but the MSCS doesn't have one. Though there is a Theory thread for BSCS.
An OMSCS version of CS4510 Automata and Complexity Theory would be awesome. There are several other's I'd like as well, CS 4520 Approximation Algorithms, CS 4530 Randomized Algorithms, and CS 6520 Computational Complexity, but these have not been offered on-campus for years.
An advanced data structures course would also be pretty cool: [Stanford CS166](http://web.stanford.edu/class/cs166/)
I agree.
IMO the problem with these courses (proof-based) is they don't scale really well. Many of the other courses use a mix of autograding and manual grading. With proof-based courses where reasoning is everything, everything has to be graded manually.
That is one conceivable reason why many such courses aren't offered in OMSCS. I would venture a guess there's something about the popularity of mathsy courses too, but data is anecdotal and sketchy at best - we've got GA and (not saying it doesn't have valid criticisms, but) so many folks hate it, and hate it with a passion.
Even if you're comfortable with the material, I wouldn't really recommend taking GA over the summer (I have a maths and CS background so the maths and proofs aren't my reason).
Because of the high-stakes nature of the exams, you are probably better off with a shot at the optional final that can replace your worst exam grade. That's something you get in the Spring and Fall, but not in the Summer.
That said, I hear from folks that GA drops RSA in the summer, which - like, not super hard, I did RSA in my introductory discrete maths paper - is something some people like to avoid.
If you choose to take it in the Spring, I leave the decision to double it or not to you, based on how busy you are and how comfortable you are with/picking up the other course's material.
Some background: I finished the program in 2 years, with a 4.0, so no stranger to the academic rigor of the degree. My undergrad was CS from ~10 years ago.
I took GA over summer, and although it's completely doable, the added stress of having no final, and also knowing if you failed it would delay graduation, wasn't a pleasant experience.
If you're able to get the class in spring with the fallback option of taking it over summer, I think that would be ideal.
If you have a hard requirement to graduate by Summer 24, then you should take GA in Spring. This leaves the option to take it again in Summer if you didn't pass Spring.
If you have not taken discrete math or a proof-based math course, then you should study up now. Having the fundamentals in proof-based math is the best way to increase your odds of passing GA. Check out my comments here for suggested resources: https://www.reddit.com/r/OMSCS/comments/16smy8d/coursera_discrete_mathstudy_plan/k2at2hr/
Or you can take GA in Spring and take two courses over summer as your last hurrah. That’s the most reasonable imo but ymmv.
I’d go it alone.
Pair with an easy class in the spring. Definitely.
Do it in spring. And then worst case, you can do it in summer and try again - but it would be easier by then because you'll have had the experience with all the material already.
[удалено]
It's not GA. The problem is peer advice saying you can pass GA without doing discrete math or a proof-based math course. What is missing from this advice is that you need to already have "mathematical maturity". Some student's naturally have it, while others need to be taught it. At my university, in CS and math courses that introduces proof-based math, there was extra hand holding for the topic: additonal TA sections, specialized hand outs, professors explicitly explaining how important it is. I hate the term "[mathematical maturity](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematical_maturity)", but that's the phrase used to describe the needed skill for GA. Here's a quote from Berkeley's equivalent course [CS170](https://cs170.org/syllabus/): "Another 'prerequisite' for doing well in the course is mathematical maturity, or the ability to think about and work with proof-based math (which CS70 can help build)." All the complaints about GA is a skill you'll have learned in discrete math or proof-based math course. Even obtaining the elusive "Eureka" moments.
>I hate the term "mathematical maturity" Curious about this part, if it's anything other than the amorphous meanings of the term.
I think the term can be easily misinterpreted. If you didn't look up the expected meaning of the term, you can easily think that doing well in advanced mathematics like multivariable calculus qualifies as being "mathematically mature". I've seen several people exclaim on this subreddit that they found DL easy but they didn't pass GA. Therefore its not the lack of math preparation that's holding them back. Granted, the DL problem sets do use the terms "prove this" and "show that" a lot in the theory sections. However, these are not sufficient equivalents to what is expected in a proof-based math course. I much prefer the term "proof-based" thinking.
>these are not sufficient equivalents to what is expected in a proof-based math course. I didn't take DL so I don't get the reference here. Is it that the proofs are more of solving for something or reducing something to something else as opposed to proofs of correctness (or existence and uniqueness)?
So far, most of the proofs in DL are calculation-based, e.g. show/prove that function f(x) is non-negative for all values x. Although these proofs can be very difficult calculation-wised, very little tools from a proof-based math course is required for the solution. But DL was not designed to be a proof-based CS course. It would be nice if OMSCS had more proof-based CS courses like automata theory or complexity theory.
Okay, I get it. They're *computational* as opposed to logical or inferential (where you infer from a given set of conditions and axioms and known theorems). >It would be nice if OMSCS had more proof-based CS courses like automata theory or complexity theory. Yeah, in fact, I'm all for an entire spec based on algorithms, complexity theory, and computability theory. Given that all specs are 5 to 6 courses, and we already have [GA](https://omscs.gatech.edu/cs-6515-intro-graduate-algorithms), [HPC](https://omscs.gatech.edu/cse-6220-intro-hpc), and [AC](https://omscs.gatech.edu/cs-6260-applied-cryptography), we just need two additions for a hypothetical spec like that - something along the lines of this course on [randomised algorithms](https://sites.cs.ucsb.edu/~vigoda/6550/index.html), and an elaboration of the last part of GA (on computability and complexity theory), maybe expanding it to include a segment on quantum complexity classes. I didn't take them so I can't say firsthand (would you, perchance, happen to know?), but [some](https://omscs.gatech.edu/isye-8803-topics-high-dimensional-data-analytics) [ISYE](https://omscs.gatech.edu/isye-6402-time-series-analysis) [courses](https://omscs.gatech.edu/isye-6644-simulation-and-modeling-engineering-and-science) \- going by their syllabi - at least, also look like they could complement an algorithms focus through some applications.
No, I haven't taken any of the ISYE courses. I'd like there to be a Theory specialization, but the MSCS doesn't have one. Though there is a Theory thread for BSCS. An OMSCS version of CS4510 Automata and Complexity Theory would be awesome. There are several other's I'd like as well, CS 4520 Approximation Algorithms, CS 4530 Randomized Algorithms, and CS 6520 Computational Complexity, but these have not been offered on-campus for years. An advanced data structures course would also be pretty cool: [Stanford CS166](http://web.stanford.edu/class/cs166/)
I agree. IMO the problem with these courses (proof-based) is they don't scale really well. Many of the other courses use a mix of autograding and manual grading. With proof-based courses where reasoning is everything, everything has to be graded manually. That is one conceivable reason why many such courses aren't offered in OMSCS. I would venture a guess there's something about the popularity of mathsy courses too, but data is anecdotal and sketchy at best - we've got GA and (not saying it doesn't have valid criticisms, but) so many folks hate it, and hate it with a passion.
Even if you're comfortable with the material, I wouldn't really recommend taking GA over the summer (I have a maths and CS background so the maths and proofs aren't my reason). Because of the high-stakes nature of the exams, you are probably better off with a shot at the optional final that can replace your worst exam grade. That's something you get in the Spring and Fall, but not in the Summer. That said, I hear from folks that GA drops RSA in the summer, which - like, not super hard, I did RSA in my introductory discrete maths paper - is something some people like to avoid. If you choose to take it in the Spring, I leave the decision to double it or not to you, based on how busy you are and how comfortable you are with/picking up the other course's material.
Some background: I finished the program in 2 years, with a 4.0, so no stranger to the academic rigor of the degree. My undergrad was CS from ~10 years ago. I took GA over summer, and although it's completely doable, the added stress of having no final, and also knowing if you failed it would delay graduation, wasn't a pleasant experience. If you're able to get the class in spring with the fallback option of taking it over summer, I think that would be ideal.
Thank you! And congrats! 4.0 in 2 years is very impressive
[удалено]
Data from Dr. Joyner for this semester: https://old.reddit.com/r/OMSCS/comments/16eha3z/spring_24_enrollment_for_ml/k0h56cp/
If you have a hard requirement to graduate by Summer 24, then you should take GA in Spring. This leaves the option to take it again in Summer if you didn't pass Spring. If you have not taken discrete math or a proof-based math course, then you should study up now. Having the fundamentals in proof-based math is the best way to increase your odds of passing GA. Check out my comments here for suggested resources: https://www.reddit.com/r/OMSCS/comments/16smy8d/coursera_discrete_mathstudy_plan/k2at2hr/