Course talk:COGS200
Here is an open discussion page for anyone in the Cogs200 class.
Post questions, comments, interesting course related material. The TAs and instructors will keep an eye on things and help answer any questions.
To log in, follow the link in the upper right hand corner of the page. Click the "Edit" tab at the top of this box to add content. The "Page" tab has information on how to add content besides text.
Please do NOT edit above this line. _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Tip: Click the page tab at the top of this webpage to go to other COGS 200 wiki pages.
Group Assignment 1 Marking Scheme
If you haven't already heard in class, the group assignments are meant to be marked more leniently.
Why you ask? It makes sense because we encourage group work and we are glad to give you higher marks for assignments that are done in groups as opposed to individual assignments.
If you fret about the mark you got, don't, because there's only 3 marks you could have gotten on this assignment and they're all pretty up there.
The marks are out of 10.
Here's the schema:
7 - You answered the question. You provided examples and backed up your claims (whether against or for Locke's view).
8 - You answered the question AND you provided proof of other claims (such as Kantian, Marr, Plato) and explained why they support or refute Locke's tabula rasa view. Basically, you went the extra mile.
9 - Basically 8 and you provided examples/ideas that were not trivial.
Note that these are all inclusive of the bonus credit that John announced to those of you that came to class. Bonus credit is 1 point. Bonus: State your research proposal idea(s)
Assignment 3 Marking Scheme
Q1: Provide a legitimate alternative theory for Mr. Snuggles' apparent gaze tracking. 2pts. Support you theory as an instance of underdetermination, indicating comprehension of the principle. 2pts. Tie in to relevant class material. 1pt.
Q2: Provide valid reasoning with evidence. 2pts Provide relevant concrete examples and/or discuss how to test/falsify your claims. Tie in to relevant class material. 1pt.
Q3: Question(s) provided are useful to test for a machine. 2pts. Choice(s) of question(s) are well defended. 2pts. Tie in to relevant class material. 1pt.
Bonus: Demonstrate an understanding of operational definitions, connected answer to discussion thereof. 2pts.
Assignment 2 Marking Scheme
1. Each design feature is worth 1 point - we have 8 in total so 8 points
2. Presents a thorough discussion comparing the bee language to natural human language. States similarities and differences with respect to the design features and effectively argues for or against the presence, in the bee language, of each design feature - 8 points
3. Effectively discusses and argues the question whether the bee dance language "makes infinite use of finite media" (Pinker, p. 84) in the same way human languages do. - 2 points
4. Writes in a clear, explicit, stylistically appropriate, and well organized manner. - 2 points
Assignment 2 details:
- They will be returned after the reading break. Please refer to the above marking scheme.
Assignment 1 Marking Scheme
Q.1: Stating whether the chunk is intelligent/unintelligent: 1 point Stating and backing it up with sound reason: 1 point
For question 1, students 'cannot' rule out the chunk as being unintelligent, however, if they did, and if they provided some solid reason for it, they would get the point.
Q.2: Component 1 of comp.theory: 0.5 point Reason for choosing this component: 0.5 point
Component 2 of comp.theory: 0.5 point Reason for choosing this component: 0.5 point
For question 2, there was ambiguity between what the computational theory (as in the system itself) and the computational theory level. Both are acceptable solutions, and students will get the point if they state either one.
Q.3 grading criteria: State a position, give two distinct reasons for it. 2pts
Additional 2 pts per reason based on the soundness of the reason (is it logically consistent, and addresses the question) and its relevance to the class material.
Philosophy and Exam Review Scheduled
Day: Wednesday, Feb. 11
Time: 1 to 3 pm
Location: 124 SOWK (Jack Bell) - 2080 West Mall
Assignment Three Online
Assignment three (philosophy) has bee posted. It is due Feb 24th.
Linguistics Review Session: Thur Feb. 5, 5:30 PM @ Buchanan A106
Assignment 2 is due on Feb 5th sorry for the confusion.
Due date of 2nd assignment? The syllabus states that the assignment is due Feb 3rd, whereas the assignment it self says Feb 5th. I assume the assignment is right as it was written most recently, but I just wanted to confirm.
Barack Obama, Justice Roberts, and the Perils of Prescriptive Grammar
Cognitive scientist Steven Pinker argues in a New York Times column that the fumbling of Obama's oath of office was caused by the misguided prescriptive grammar rule against "split verbs". See here: [1] (Hotze)
Q&A 1/21/09 COGS LAB.
<
>
Oops, no date change
There will be a social event run by the Cognitive Systems Society for all Cogs students this week on Thursday, January 15 Koerner's Pub at 5pm. There will be beer supplied by the CSS, and your professors and TAs will be there. Come say hi and get to know the program!
Daniel Dennett (an important contemporary thinker in cognitive science and philosophy) is giving a lecture Wednesday, January 14th at 7:00 pm. The lecture will take place a Frederic Wood theater (6354 Crescent Rd. UBC). Tickets must be acquired ahead of time, and are available free at the Biodiversity Research Center Office (Biological Sciences Building Rm. 4336). We were told that max 2 tickets per person will be given out, but they may run out soon.
Cogs200
- [View source↑]
- [History↑]