Simon Dobson

Posted on Wednesday 21 January, 2015

2015 CPHC/BCS Distinguished Dissertations competition

The 2015 CPHC/BCS Distinguished Dissertations competition is now open for submissions via the submissions site. Closing date Wednesday 1 April 2015. Further details can be found below and on the competition web page. The Council of Professors and Heads of Computing (CPHC), in conjunction with BCS, The Chartered Institute for IT, annually selects for publication the best British PhD/DPhil dissertations in computer science. The scheme aims to make more visible the significant contribution made by the UK - in particular by post-graduate students - to computer science. Publication also serves to provide a model for future students. The selection panel on behalf of BCS/CPHC consists of experienced computer scientists, not more than one from any institution, each normally serving on the panel for three years. Any dissertation is eligible which is submitted for a doctorate in the British Isles in what is commonly understood as Computer Science. (Theses which are basically in some other discipline but which make use, even very extensive use, of computing will not be regarded as eligible.)  However, there is a limit of THREE dissertations per year per university, and one per research group within any university. To be considered, a dissertation should:

  • make a noteworthy contribution to the subject;
  • reach a high standard of exposition;
  • place its results clearly in the context of computer science as a whole; and
  • enable a computer scientist with significantly different interests to grasp its essentials.
It is reasonable to submit a thesis to the scheme if it has all of the above qualities in good measure, and if it is comparable in standard with the top 10% of dissertations in the subject. Long dissertations are not encouraged; if the main text is more than 80,000 words, there should be good justification. The dissertation should be submitted electronically (as a PDF file) by the author’s examiners, or by the Head of Department with the examiner’s advice. The submitted version of the dissertation must be the final version after any required corrections have been made. The competition period for the 2015 competition is for theses accepted from 1 January 2014 until the closing date of 1 April 2015. A dissertation cannot be submitted to the competition more than once. The dissertation should be accompanied by a written nomination comprising the following information:
  • a justification, of about 300 words, by one of the examiners — preferably the external — explaining the dissertation’s claim to  distinction (against the criteria listed above);
  • the name of the primary supervisor and the research group within the university to which the student was primarily affiliated;
  • an assurance that within the competition period the examiners have recommended to the author’s institution that the doctorate should be awarded;
  • the names and contact details of three suggested reviewers who are not in the same Department as the nominated thesis and who are independent of the supervision and examining of the thesis; and
  • an indication should be given if the dissertation is being considered for publication elsewhere.
The nominated reviewers must have confirmed that they are willing to provide a review. In addition the author’s written agreement that their thesis may be considered for the Distinguished Dissertation competition should be emailed by the author to disdis15@easychair.org. Submissions should be made on-line via http://www.easychair.org/conferences/?conf=disdis15 The first author name submitted should be that of the thesis author; the individual submitting the nomination should list themselves as the second author. The title and abstract should be those of the thesis being nominated. The first file uploaded should be the 300 word nomination; the thesis document should be uploaded as an attachment. If any problems are experienced, or you have any questions, please email disdis15@easychair.org for assistance. The deadline for submission is 1 April 2015.
Posted on Thursday 1 January, 2015

American Prometheus: The Triumph and Tragedy of J. Robert Oppenheimer

Kai Bird (2005)

Hard to imagine a better scientific and political biography.

I had a rough understanding of Oppenheimer’s story: his management of the Manhattan project, his victimisation during the McCarthy witchhunts, and his directorship of the Institute for Advanced Study. What I hadn’t realised was his own scientific standing: his association with Born, Bathe, Dirac, Heisenberg, and others, and the fact that his own contributions rank alongside theirs, including his first formulation of the equations describing black holes. Despite not entering at all into the technicalities, the authors make clear how deeply embedded he was into the initial descriptions and elaborations of quantum mechanics.

The book is squally strong when dealing with the development of the bomb and with the aftermath, the lead-up to Oppenheimer’s trial as a security risk brought about in part by his principled opposition to the development of the “Super”, or hydrogen bomb. The treatment is well-balanced, making no attempt to hide the part Oppenheimer played in his own downfall (although still being somewhat at a loss to describe many elements of his behaviour).

The picture that emerges is of a profound scientist and humanist who was destroyed at least in part by his own fragilities and complexities: aspects of his character that undoubtedly helped in his greatness as we as leading to his downfall. That this element of Greek tragedy would have been deeply appreciated by Oppenheimer himself only adds to the sense of a contribution spoiled by the actions of men who failed to understand what drove him and what he could give.

5/5. Finished Thursday 1 January, 2015.

(Originally published on Goodreads.)

Posted on Wednesday 24 December, 2014

The Black Death in London

Barney Sloane (2011)

A detailed examination of the Plague in London in 1349 and subsequently. Sloane finds a novel way to track the progress of the Black Death, using wills and ecclesiastical replacements to identify “hot spots” that can be tentatively projected out to the rest of the population. While being very careful to recognise the limits of this approach, he arrives at a mortality rate of around 45% of London’s population.

One surprising snippet from the book is the surprisingly few children couples were having in the 14th century: not much higher than in modern times in Europe, in essence, whereas I’d expected something closer to rates in modern Africa.

The book has a good bibliography into modern Plague research, which (given I’m reading this for professional purposes as well as just for interest) will come in handy.

4/5. Finished Wednesday 24 December, 2014.

(Originally published on Goodreads.)

Posted on Wednesday 17 December, 2014

Great Degeneration

Niall Ferguson (2012)

In a great fan of Niall Ferguson’s writing and scholarship, but this isn’t one of his better works. It’s not that there’s anything at all wrong with his central message that many of the institutions that have raised-up western civilisation are being undermined. The problem I have is the fatalism with which he presents these problems, and the notion that it is somehow pre-ordained by historical processes: a view that feels almost Marxist without the positive expected outcome.

I think this is a book that cries out for a longer treatment or a second volume, an analysis and comparison of other approaches to societal problems, or an analysis of the ways in which the tensions that Ferguson sees building up might be released, even if those comparisons and processes would inevitably end in disaster.

2/5. Finished Wednesday 17 December, 2014.

(Originally published on Goodreads.)

Posted on Wednesday 17 December, 2014

Compelling People: The Hidden Qualities That Make Us Influential

John Neffinger (2013)

An essay masquerading as a book.

Don’t get me wrong: I enjoyed it. It’s just that the point it’s making – that the way we project ourselves involves a mixture of strength and warmth, which are two concepts that sit uneasily together and make it hard to make the impressions we seek to make ‐ could have been stated in a longform essay rather than a book. Instead we’re treated to the same concepts applied to different personal-development challenges in ways that don’t really seem to contribute anything to the message.

2/5. Finished Wednesday 17 December, 2014.

(Originally published on Goodreads.)