chess: (doing some serious work)
Michelle Taylor ([personal profile] chess) wrote2005-01-18 01:24 pm

Dull exam post-mortem

I survived this morning's Progress Test; here, have an exam post-mortem.

Section A:

Question 1: stuff I didn't know, except for the 5 mark bit on DMA

Question 2: stuff I *really* didn't know about wavelets and Fourier transforms; didn't try.

Section B:

Question 3: the convex hull problem, which I did know, except for the bit about how you find whether a point is within a given polygon, which we were never taught and the websites I found on it were of the 'look, it's simple' school of geometry (i.e. did not explain in a way I could follow despite it being GCSE maths). So a maximum of 14 marks, probably less because I had to fudge 'what do you do if the topmost point is also the leftmost when trying to eliminate points in the middle?' as I have no idea what the correct answer is.

Question 4: required drawing some vast decoding diagram which I remember seeing in the notes and running away from in terror, and my brain gliding off the impenetrable lecture concerning it. Didn't do.

Section C:

Question 5: lots of stuff about concurrency that I couldn't remember clearly enough to give a good attempt, although I did start by trying to do this question.

Question 6: A bunch of 5-mark definitions including safe ground like generics (which I just looked up everything about a day or so ago to do some coding). Still am not sure what 'pure and impure names' are, although I waffled something vaguely plausible. No idea if I said the correct things about some of the other bits. Probably 10-15 marks.

Section D:
Question 7: A nice set of unification / sequent / substitution / explanation problems, all of which I could do quite happily except the first sequent because the quantifiers didn't want to come out right. Probably 17 marks or so, unless I did something horribly wrong and didn't spot it.

Question 8: Stuff to do with resolution, which always confuses me.

Section E:

Question 9: A very straightforward question on IEEE floating point. The most awkward bit was the binary arithmatic; unfortunately I forgot how binary points worked and hence confused myself rather when converting 1.125 into
binary. I now remember and am going 'aargh, that was obvious'. So probably 18 marks.

Question 10: Something complicated from the Numerical Analysis course that I didn't even look at because IEEE floating point is so much easier than anything else on the course.

Post a comment in response:

If you don't have an account you can create one now.
HTML doesn't work in the subject.
More info about formatting

If you are unable to use this captcha for any reason, please contact us by email at support@dreamwidth.org