Aktuella utvärderingar

Visa resultat

Här kan se resultatet från utvärderingen och exportera statistiken till ett annat program. Det går också att göra en enkel filtrering genom att klicka på svarsalternativen och kommentarerna eller en avancerad filtrering genom att använda knappen längst ned.

Autonomous agents (theory part), FFR125

Status: Avslutad
Öppen för svar: 2011-03-24 - 2011-03-28
Antal svar: 13
Procent av deltagarna som svarat: 54%
Kontaktperson: Mattias Wahde»
Utbildningsprogram som genomför enkäten: Teknisk fysik 300 hp


1. How do you rate the lectures?

Please write a comment.

13 svarande

Not good at all»1 7%
Not so good»0 0%
Neither good nor bad»2 15%
Good»4 30%
Very good»6 46%

Genomsnitt: 4.07 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- I was only attending one lecture.» (Neither good nor bad)
- We could delve more into the breadth of the topic of current research at the initial few lectures . I believe the course requires more breadth in terms of whats happening in the world of robotics» (Neither good nor bad)
- Since my background is slightly different then most (IT and CS:ALL) I"m having a bit more trouble with the motor and mechanical parts of the course, but could have skipped the ones with Dijkstra"s and exploration algorithms. I would like more explanations and examples, but with a set topic per lecture so I could skip the ones I was already familiar with and have a full two hour lecture of the rest of the subjects.» (Good)
- Few lecturers are as straight forward and efficient as Mattias.» (Very good)
- Very good correlation between lectures and reading material. » (Very good)

2. To what extent have the lectures been of help for your learning?

12 svarande

Not at all»0 0%
Some extent»1 8%
Large extent»8 66%
Very large extent»3 25%

Genomsnitt: 3.16 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- Good and interesting.» (Large extent)
- Though the lecture notes would probably have been sufficient.» (Large extent)

3. To what extent have the home problems been of help for your learning?

13 svarande

Small extent»1 7%
Some extent»3 23%
Large extent»3 23%
Very large extent»6 46%

Genomsnitt: 3.07 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- Almost some free points on the exam for doing the home problems properly.» (Very large extent)
- I liked that the home problems really contributed to the learning of the course literature. A nice addition to the home problems could be data sheets of the sensors used in the simulation etc. to not only practice the brain processes but also how to simulate various sensors.» (Very large extent)

4. What is your impression of the Matlab robot simulator used during the course?

12 svarande

Very poor»2 16%
Poor»0 0%
Neutral»1 8%
Good»7 58%
Very good»2 16%

Genomsnitt: 3.58

- Being the first version of the Simulator it was intuitive and great! i believe it will undergo more evolution. AIBOTs is an interesting program for developing the process of problem solving in robotics» (Neutral)
- Easy to use. I love MATLAB, so that is a plus. Don"t know whether we missed some advanced features.» (Good)
- It did the job. Some explanatory comments here and there in the code might be a good idea. » (Good)
- Sufficient for the course. Matlab is not really used in my civ.eng. or master (IT and CS:ALL) but was easy enough to learn what was needed.» (Good)
- I think it is good. Easy to understand, and advanced enough for this course» (Good)
- Easy to understandand and work with, which made it possible to focus on writing the behaviors.» (Very good)
- Good enough for the course requirements. » (Very good)

5. What is your impression of the course literature?

Course literature: Lecture notes, slides, and scientific papers

13 svarande

Very poor»1 7%
Poor»0 0%
Average»2 15%
Good»6 46%
Very good»4 30%

Genomsnitt: 3.92 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- not so difficult!» (Average)
- Sometimes a little too much info which » (Good)
- Mattias writing is excellent.» (Very good)
- Very clear and straight to the point. All material i.e. lectures, literature and home problems treated the course material in a nice synergy.» (Very good)
- Very good lecture nesot» (Very good)

6. How well did the course administration, web page, communication etc. work?

13 svarande

Very badly»0 0%
Rather badly»0 0%
Rather well»5 38%
Very well»8 61%

Genomsnitt: 3.61 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- Good, although I would like to have an RSS/Atom feed, and also not have two separate pages for the different parts of the course.» (Rather well)
Genomsnitt totalt för detta stycke: 3.57

Your own efforts

7. How many hours per week did you spend on this course?

Hours per week include time in lectures, reading the course literature, working with home problems etc.

12 svarande

At most 15 hours»4 33%
About 20 hours»0 0%
About 25 hours»6 50%
At least 30 hours»2 16%

Genomsnitt: 2.5 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- I was bad with time management.» (At most 15 hours)
- Difficult to estimate, but somewhere around 25. Workload differed quite a lot between weeks.» (About 25 hours)

8. How large part of the teaching offered did you attend?

12 svarande

Less than 20%»1 8%
20-40%»0 0%
41-60%»0 0%
61-80%»2 16%
More than 80%»9 75%

Genomsnitt: 4.5 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

Genomsnitt totalt för detta stycke: 3.5

Study climate

9. How were the opportunities for asking questions and getting help during the course?

13 svarande

Very poor»1 7%
Rather poor»0 0%
Rather good»3 23%
Very good»4 30%
I did not seek help»5 38%

Genomsnitt: 3.92 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

10. How was the course workload?

13 svarande

Too low»0 0%
Low»0 0%
Adequate»5 38%
High»5 38%
Too high»3 23%

Genomsnitt: 3.84 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- Very good balance, but together with the practical part it does feel a bit more than 7.5 points. But do not make the theoretical part any smaller!» (Adequate)
- The home problems took some time, although many were optional... so the final verdict: pehaps a bit too high workload..maybe?» (High)
- Workload is high for this part of the course.» (High)
- To be a 50% course in the third quarter, it takes to much time..» (Too high)
Genomsnitt totalt för detta stycke: 3.88

Course goals, level of difficulty, exam

11. How understandable are the course goals?

Note that a description of the course contents was given in the first lecture. You may wish to revisit the slides from that lecture.

12 svarande

Not at all understandable»0 0%
Somewhat understandable»4 33%
Completely understandable»8 66%

Genomsnitt: 2.66 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

12. Is the level of difficulty of the course reasonable, considering your background and the number of credits?

13 svarande

No, the level is too low»1 7%
Yes, the level is reasonable»9 69%
No, the level is too high»3 23%

Genomsnitt: 2.15

- The level is very reasonable, however, it has a much higher work load than most other courses at Chalmers. » (Yes, the level is reasonable)

13. Did the exam reflect the contents of the course?

13 svarande

Not at all»0 0%
No»0 0%
To some extent»3 23%
Yes»6 46%
Yes, completely»4 30%

Genomsnitt: 4.07 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- To much focus of very uninteresting details.» (To some extent)
- I think it might be debatable whether it is necessary to remember some equations, such as the scan match error that was included in this year"s exam.» (Yes)
- Difficult to show how much you"ve learnt during a 4h exam.» (Yes)

14. Did the examination as a whole assess whether you have reached the goals?

The course was examined in two parts:

Home problems (25p)
Exam (25p)

13 svarande

No, not at all»2 15%
Yes, to some extent»7 53%
Yes, definitely»4 30%

Genomsnitt: 2.15 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- Probably did. The correction might be a bit too harsh though. » (Yes, to some extent)
Genomsnitt totalt för detta stycke: 2.97

Summarizing questions

15. What is your general impression of the course?

13 svarande

Very poor»0 0%
Poor»1 7%
Average»3 23%
Good»4 30%
Very Good»5 38%

Genomsnitt: 4 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- A very good and interresting course. I wish that more courses at Chalmers would be like this one. The work load is high, but you learn a lot at the same time.» (Very Good)

16. Is there anything you think should be changed until next year?

- Maybe have a date set up for the exam by the system to avoid debate about the date. »
- I think if there would be some labs for working on Matlab before starting with home problems that would be great. Because the time for doing the home problems is limited so lack of knowledge and skill in working with Matlab makes even the simple tasks twisting.»
- 1) Increase the breadth of topics included and reduce details on particular algorithms. Reason : I took CAS only for Robotics and considering the fact there are only two foucsed Robotics courses in the Msc. Program i expected much more from the course.»
- No, it was very well balanced.»
- One idea would be to extend the course to 15 credits so one doesn"t need to take it as an extra course.»
- The exam should focus less on specific formulas and calculation, and more on general ideas and applications. The specifics can be covered in home assignments and tasks.»
- Maybe the correction of the home problems and exam is a bit too strict. It is very easy to loose points, even tho you have solved the problems.»

17. Would you recommend this course to other students? Why?

- Yes, because it was very interesting to see that one could do so much with a robot without making it too complicated. Also it was a lot of fun to see the progress of ones robot in the simulator.»
- yes. Because i think the course covers the theory and practical part quite well. I mean it gives a good insight how to implement what we learn in theory of the course.»
- No , I would"nt recommend the course to fellow robot enthusiasts who would"ve covered a lot of what was taught as a part of their interest in the Subject. As an introductory course at Bachelors level it may be a great course»
- Yes, because it is fun and interesting. Desert ants rules!»
- Yes.»
- No»
- Interresting course, you learn a lot and get hands on experience.»

18. Which areas do you think should be covered in more (or less) depth?

Topics covered: Autonomous robots, kinematics and dynamics, animal behavior, behavior-based robotics,
exploration, navigation and localization, decision-making

- navigation and localization»
- Perhaps, emphasize less on animal behaviour and electrics, (didn"t seem as relevent as the rest), and more on navigation/localization/decision-making.»
- Autonomous Robots : Greater Depth : Practical examples lie AIBO , KISMET and how they work which should help develop a base for research. Kinematics And Dynamics : By shifting the focus of the course the depth on these topic will reduce. Animal Behaviour : Ok BBR : OK SLAM : Needs greater depth in a Msc. Course as this is the most active topic in Robotics today Decision Making : More depth needed.»
- It is good as it is. Could be one lecture about what will be in Humanoid Robotics.»
- A very narrow course and very difficult to understand why one should pay so much attention to very narrow details in the course. The feeling is that the course is done much more difficult then nessary.»
- Less on kinematics and dynamics, i.e. cut out the "lowest" parts.»
- I think the distribution of time spend on each chapter was good.»

19. Additional comments

Genomsnitt totalt för detta stycke: 4

Genomsnitt totalt för alla frågor: 3.5
Beräknat jämförelseindex: 0.73

Kursutvärderingssystem från