I'm back from my hiatus. I spent a good 10 days on a whirlwind trip across the great plains of Nebraska and Kansas (with some Missouri time in there). It was a good break and time to spend with friends and family. Always a good idea in my book.
But, now that I'm back, been thinking a lot about a lot of things. In particular, I'm still going through the Atkins report, a report that was published by the NSF detailing what should be done to fund the CyberInfrastructure. There are a lot of good nuggets in this document. Below is one I thought elucidated some good distinctions between Research, Development, and Operations.
Research
Research is a competition of ideas. Allocation of resources starts with the program announcement and evaluation of the resulting proposals. This is bottom-up, stating the evaluation criteria with detailed initiatives arising from the research community. Overlap or duplication is acceptable where different researchers pursue competing visions for accomplishing similar ends. Post-evaluation is based on the intellectual quality and impact of the research outcomes.
Development
Development is a competition of plans. An overriding goal of development is to limit duplication of effort, and concentrate resources on a set of integrated and maintained software distributions collectively covering the scope of the ACP. Thus, development is partitioned and assigned to organizations based on the responsiveness to needs and credibility of their plan for pre-defined concrete outcomes. Post-evaluation is based on how effectively the plan has been implemented and also on how extensively the outcomes are adopted and used and on user satisfaction.
Operations
Operations is a competition for users. Operations serve end-users, domain scientists, and engineering researchers, responsively providing service and support. There should be two or more competitive operational options available to users. A primary point of post-evaluation should be the satisfaction of the users who are served, and to a lesser extent the number of users who are served, based on input from the user community.
-----------
Kipp
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
http://messenger.yahoo.com/
Friday, June 11, 2004
Thursday, May 27, 2004
Semantic integration
Another article from David McGoveran[1] (gotta admit he writes some good stuff) notes that the primary types of semantic transofrmation are:
*
Combining two or more fields having different data types
*
Decomposing a field into two or more new fields
*
Aggregating multiple values
*
Disaggregating aggregate values
*
Consolidation
*
Synchronization
*
Generalization
*
Sub-typing
I include them here so I don't lose them.
He goes on to state something that fits in with my thoughts regarding TDQM (Total Data Quality Management) although my thoughts extend outside of an enterprise and really drive towards a supporting infrastructure for TDQM rather than the processes and responsibility questions that are addressed by TDQM.
Here are the elements of TDQM:
1. Fill the repository incrementally, never “upfront.” This is a pragmatic, not academic, effort.
2. Ensure that the repository supports a theory of semantic types. It should define data semantics by capturing constraints and not just data syntax, and relate them to existing types through dependencies.
3. Don’t accept application software unless data semantics has been defined in an importable data model.
4. Use versioning, partitioning, and type relationships to organize metadata. Never delete it.
5. Commit to driving application development and integration projects from the repository.
6. Use data integration tasks as opportunities to use, refine and validate the repository.
These are all very good points and certainly make a lot of sense. #3 is a tough one for companies to enforce, and we probably need to think of compensating actions to take for those instances where the absolutes are not an option.
I'd also take #5 a lot further to say that it is not just driving application development and integration projects from the repository, that a lot of the applications themselves can be made more valuable to the users by leveraging the repository. There is a lot of value in having this information available and we need to find ways to leverage it.
[1] Data Integration, Part VIII, eAI Journal, January 2003
Kipp Jones - CTO
nuBridges, LLC - www.nubridges.com
eBusiness is Business
cell: 404.213.9293
work: 770.730.3722
*
Combining two or more fields having different data types
*
Decomposing a field into two or more new fields
*
Aggregating multiple values
*
Disaggregating aggregate values
*
Consolidation
*
Synchronization
*
Generalization
*
Sub-typing
I include them here so I don't lose them.
He goes on to state something that fits in with my thoughts regarding TDQM (Total Data Quality Management) although my thoughts extend outside of an enterprise and really drive towards a supporting infrastructure for TDQM rather than the processes and responsibility questions that are addressed by TDQM.
Here are the elements of TDQM:
1. Fill the repository incrementally, never “upfront.” This is a pragmatic, not academic, effort.
2. Ensure that the repository supports a theory of semantic types. It should define data semantics by capturing constraints and not just data syntax, and relate them to existing types through dependencies.
3. Don’t accept application software unless data semantics has been defined in an importable data model.
4. Use versioning, partitioning, and type relationships to organize metadata. Never delete it.
5. Commit to driving application development and integration projects from the repository.
6. Use data integration tasks as opportunities to use, refine and validate the repository.
These are all very good points and certainly make a lot of sense. #3 is a tough one for companies to enforce, and we probably need to think of compensating actions to take for those instances where the absolutes are not an option.
I'd also take #5 a lot further to say that it is not just driving application development and integration projects from the repository, that a lot of the applications themselves can be made more valuable to the users by leveraging the repository. There is a lot of value in having this information available and we need to find ways to leverage it.
[1] Data Integration, Part VIII, eAI Journal, January 2003
Kipp Jones - CTO
nuBridges, LLC - www.nubridges.com
eBusiness is Business
cell: 404.213.9293
work: 770.730.3722
Tuesday, May 25, 2004
Business Semantics
Case in point:
An article published back in 2000 about the semantics of data and why it is important to understand the meaning of the data in order to do business to business integration. The author, David McGoveran, argues the point that of the 2 of the 3 main ingedients that are required for an integrated information exchange have been adequately solved:
1) Connectivity
2) Timley capture and purveyance of data
3) Understanding the data
I agree with this premise, as well as the conclusion he draws that all "public data elements pertaining to a set of integrated applications, whether stored in a relational database or not, as though they were attributes of a formally designed relational database."
I disagree with the method by which we need to get there. According to the author, "maintainable business semantics...is worth a little formal design effort involving application vendors and developers." Yes, formal design is necessary, but I say it is insufficient.
Why? Because the tools for formal design and the method for maintaining the semantics after the formal design and managing change to these formal designs are fundamentally missing. It is like having CASE tools that don't do round trip. Sure, it's valuable the first time, but the value degrades exponentially over time, and in fact, I would argue that the uncertainty that is caused by the lack of integrity of the documentation versus the acutal causes the documentation to be virtually worthless right off the bat.
If I don't have assurances that I have the right version of the documentation for the system that I'm using, I'll probably spend extra time verifying it...and thus I've lost a good amount of the value of having the documentation even if it is a small fraction of the documentation that is actually invalid. I use the term documentation to refer to any artifcats regarding the semantics of the information, its relationship to other information and the methods by which I can gain access to and/or manipulate the information.
I would also point out that much of the metadata about an actual data model is embedded in databases, contained in their system catalogs. And yet this information is not easily accessible to most humans, it's not easily exchanged, nor is it sufficient to specify the semantics of the information.
We need more, and it can't be solely dependent on the actions of the few, the proud, the "data architects." We are dealing with living systems that evolve over time. They can't rely on rigid constructs and upfront knowlege. They must be able to adapt, grow, expand, connect and self-correct over time.
I regard this as the challenge.
Kipp
nuBridges, LLC - www.nubridges.com
eBusiness is Business
cell: 404.213.9293
work: 770.730.372
On Information Quality
A fundamental difference that I have with some people is that I cannot insist that information quality be specified from the onset. Rather, information must be injected into the systems with whaterver quality it currently has.
To me, this is like the debate of closed hypertext systems versus open hypertext systems that raged prior to the WWW taking off. Closed systems required high quality data with full referential integrity. Yes, this provided a nice clean environment and once complete, was generally of a high quality. The problem was, that producing fully 'cleaned' information with full referential integriity from the outset is difficult. The onus is put on the human to make all of this happen prior to the information even being captured in the system.
This is the critical break down. The hurdles to adding information to the system must be low. Information must be able to be injected into the system ad hoc with little preparation and cleansing. It should be added, captured, and annotated.
The system should be responsible for helping determine the quality of the information. It should have mechanisms in place to help 'clean' up the information. It should have anti-entropy mechanisms, data validation mechanisms, anomolous data isolation mechanims, and sufficient feedback loops to ensure a constant increase in the overal quality of the information in the system.
You can certainly understand both the desire and the reasoning behind 'closed' information stores. The database community has lived or died by the 'quality' of the information in the database. If a foreign key constraint is missing, or a table is missing referential integrity, the whole thing starts to fall apart. Why is this? It's because the system was built to depend on the upfront quality of the data rather than relying on mechanisms and systems that handle 'dirty' data and are able to recover from situations in which everything is not pristine.
This model is still valuable for some domain of problems, but it is an ever decreasing set of problems.
The other thing that has driven the requirement for 'clean' data has been the cost of computing, networks, algorithms and storage. All of these factors made it much more cost effective to demand data quality up front rather than worry about creating a system which can deal with uncertainty. By storing only 'clean' data, the system stores only what it needs, no more. The semantics and the relationships of all of the data are stored with in the structure of the information, thus not requiring any external representation of the relationships.
The Web as an open hypertext system, was able to grow super exponentially due in large part because of its open architecture which did not require any kind of referential integrity, quality criteria, or 'gatekeeper' function. Information has been injected into the WWW at such a rapid rate that it is currently very difficult to even estimate the global size of the WWW. There is no doubt that there is 'bad' data and low quality information on the Web today. What is interesting to watch is some of the natural(?) or evovled mechanisms which have come into play to isolate and improve the overall quality of information on the Web. Many of these mechanisms are human in nature today (such as manual linking), but there is much that can be done to improve the qualtiy through automated systems.
An early attempt was made with the Atlas Link Database that we worked on in '95. The goal of this system was to use embedded knowlege within the system (link hrefs and referer information) to continuously update and correct broken links. This is just a small element of the overall problem, but certainly starts to demonstrate the power of using the information to do self correction.
With the continual improvements in the Semantic Web, Web Services and other related technologies, the Web is moving from a massively linked open hypertext system to a massively linked open database system. I believe that we are currently embroiled in some similar arguments about closed versus open in the database world that we had 10 years ago in the hypertext world.
Ultimately, the open model will prevail for its ability to scale across domains, networks, and technologies. But this will not happen without a lot of work on the mechanisms to judge, rank, correct, and clean the information that is injected into the system.
Kipp
nuBridges, LLC - www.nubridges.com
eBusiness is Business
cell: 404.213.9293
work: 770.730.3722
Wednesday, May 19, 2004
WWW2004
Arrived in NY (after a 2 hour delay in Atlanta due to a storm in DC) last night. Checked in and slept.
Registered this morning and ran into Joseph Hardin, now at U of Michigan. I bumped into him several times when he was at UIUC back in the day when I was working on the NCSA web server adding the atlas functionality to it...which was mere months after the whole Mosaic thing took place and everybody moved from Urbana-Champaign out to the Valley to make it rich.
We'll see what today has in store, should be a lot of semantics!
Kipp
Registered this morning and ran into Joseph Hardin, now at U of Michigan. I bumped into him several times when he was at UIUC back in the day when I was working on the NCSA web server adding the atlas functionality to it...which was mere months after the whole Mosaic thing took place and everybody moved from Urbana-Champaign out to the Valley to make it rich.
We'll see what today has in store, should be a lot of semantics!
Kipp
Monday, May 17, 2004
Monday
A couple of items to note:
First, Ken pointed me to a very nice package for setting up sites: Mambo http://www.mamboserver.com/ This open source software seems to rock.
Second, started integrating Jess into BizCQ. Need to continue working with that and expand the web service interface. Need a better way to create rules for Jess related to BizCQ.
Third, heading to NY tomorrow for WWW2004 to present a poster on BizCQ.
Lastly, good weekend with the kids. Two soccer games and one Ballet picture day. Also, had fun having Aunt LaLa in town. Too bad Brian couldn't come and play...
Kipp
nuBridges, LLC - www.nubridges.com
eBusiness is Business
cell: 404.213.9293
work: 770.730.3722
Friday, May 14, 2004
On Expenses
Why is that when a company who you have asked to help you feels like it is okay to have you pay more for something than they would themselves?
Case in point. recently had a training course (which is another topic in and of itself) on site in which we were responsible for expenses. The expenses for a 2 day training course came in at over $1000. Granted this includes flight and hotel, but it certainly wasn't an international flight, and it's not like staying in NY.
It would seem to me that normal business sense would have you charge your customer what you would expect to be charged if the roles were reversed. Just because somebody else is paying doesn't mean that there are no rules about reasonable expense. Companies would do well to set a limit for 'reasonable' and require notification/approval for out of bounds items.
Rant, rant, rant
Monday, May 10, 2004
On another note...
I'm going to my 20th high school reunion in a few days. Class of '84 which graduated with 14 people from Beaver Valley High School in Lebanon, Nebraska. Probably not a lot of people out there have visited. The town now has about 75 people in it, none of which are my classmates.
In fact we're having it Lincoln, Nebraska...which would be really great if a Husker game was going on...
In addition to that travel, I'm presenting a poster at the 13th International World Wide Web conference in NY, NY next week. Haven't been to one of these since '96. Looking forward to seeing where things are and getting a sense for what's next in the WWW world.
Kipp
nuBridges, LLC - www.nubridges.com
eBusiness is Business
cell: 404.213.9293
work: 770.730.3722
Checking to see if I can still blog...
Been awhile since I was out here, hopefully can start it up for real this time.
Some interesting things in technology I've been looking at:
- Space technology - interested in where business is going to go wrt space
- BPM - we've went deep into BPM for our new product release, where else is BPM and workflow technology useful
- Semantics - still interested in semantic mapping, semantics of change, information quality via semantics
- Rules engines - how can rules engines help with semantic problems?
On the science side:
- evolution - very interesting topic
- things nano
- anti-gravity
Other than that, keeping the kids going takes up any extra time I may have...
Been awhile since I was out here, hopefully can start it up for real this time.
Some interesting things in technology I've been looking at:
- Space technology - interested in where business is going to go wrt space
- BPM - we've went deep into BPM for our new product release, where else is BPM and workflow technology useful
- Semantics - still interested in semantic mapping, semantics of change, information quality via semantics
- Rules engines - how can rules engines help with semantic problems?
On the science side:
- evolution - very interesting topic
- things nano
- anti-gravity
Other than that, keeping the kids going takes up any extra time I may have...
Friday, July 18, 2003
Interesting ontology editor and framework from Stanford:
The Protégé Ontology Editor and Knowledge Acquisition System
The Protégé Ontology Editor and Knowledge Acquisition System
Sunday, June 29, 2003
The current name for their company is MotionSpeak, rather catchy. Some really good thought has gone into this thing.
Questions I have are:
1) How far behind are companies like macromedia and microsoft on competing technologies? At least on the publishing side...
2) If the first target is kiosk operation, how much of the infrastructure to manage, distribute, authorize, charge, track, bill, etc. has been built. Who manages what aspects of the process and system, advertisers, advertising agents, host, host syndicate owner, others?
3) Others have targeted ASP model tools (Javu Technologies for example which built an extensive suite of non-linear editing tools for online movie editing and publishing). Is it the authoring tool, the publishing tool, or the management tool that you see as primary drivers of the business?
4) How does this compete/complement the double clicks of the world?
5) Seems like the quickest hit would be to hit the Yahoo or eBays. The complexities of establishing a management and distribution system for the other outlets may take some time.
Questions I have are:
1) How far behind are companies like macromedia and microsoft on competing technologies? At least on the publishing side...
2) If the first target is kiosk operation, how much of the infrastructure to manage, distribute, authorize, charge, track, bill, etc. has been built. Who manages what aspects of the process and system, advertisers, advertising agents, host, host syndicate owner, others?
3) Others have targeted ASP model tools (Javu Technologies for example which built an extensive suite of non-linear editing tools for online movie editing and publishing). Is it the authoring tool, the publishing tool, or the management tool that you see as primary drivers of the business?
4) How does this compete/complement the double clicks of the world?
5) Seems like the quickest hit would be to hit the Yahoo or eBays. The complexities of establishing a management and distribution system for the other outlets may take some time.
So, Steve Youngblood and Volker Shultz have put together an idea, prototype and business plan for a company they call PointWare. In esscence, it is a flash publishing and hosting (asp) system targeting advertisers (small to medium) who want dynamic content in their online ads. Potentially targetting things such as coffee shop kiosk type advertising, online auction sites (yahoo, ebay), and double click like advertising organizations.
The system is really nice visually and creates a nifty swf file when done that is easily editable and publishable. They have done a good job with the UI and the experience, however if you are used to direct manipulation (e.g. power point) you will be somewhat disappointed in the awkwardness that this interface forces you into.
A nice tool, and some interesting potential. It also is in the arena of information publishing which does interest me.
They would like to consider me as a potential 3rd person in their company. I find this quite flattering, and have seriously considered how I could become involved. However, with the other things currently going on in my life, I'm going to have to bow out.
The system is really nice visually and creates a nifty swf file when done that is easily editable and publishable. They have done a good job with the UI and the experience, however if you are used to direct manipulation (e.g. power point) you will be somewhat disappointed in the awkwardness that this interface forces you into.
A nice tool, and some interesting potential. It also is in the arena of information publishing which does interest me.
They would like to consider me as a potential 3rd person in their company. I find this quite flattering, and have seriously considered how I could become involved. However, with the other things currently going on in my life, I'm going to have to bow out.
Monday, June 23, 2003
Okay, just got back from a long weekend helping Brian Godinez celebrate his 50th birthday in McAllen Texas. What a blast. Pam, Risa, Laney and I took off late Thursday, showed up in Corpus Christi, rented a piece of crap Cavalier and drove to McAllen. About 1:30AM woke Brian and LaLa up and quickly crashed.
Friday, 4:30 AM. Brian grabs Cliff (who fell off the wagon (14months worth) the night before and was a hurtin' unit) and me up. Drove to Leguna Somethinguna where we jumped on board with skipper Janey. She was a blast. Sun was still down, but we set out. Fished until around 1:30, caught about 15 trout, 1 red fish, and I nailed a flounder (ugly damn fish). Drank a couple beers and got damn hot.
Friday after making it back to the house, got ready and went over to Aunt Judy's for a night of celebrating with kids and full family. Judy has an amazing party house, with a pool and a party building (pool table, foosball table, the works. Kids had so much fun in the pool. Drank beer (not the kids...) and then went back to Brian's place. Drank a buttload of tequilla (brian had jiggers rather than shot glasses, so those 4 shots were really 6!). Got yelled at by Pam for being loud, and then passed out around 2:30AM.
Saturday morning --- ouch...breakfast, ouch, a couple hour nap, and then back into action. Prepare for the adult party which was held at a bar on the Rio Grande river overlooking Mexico. Great location, but damn hot. Drank, danced, roasted brian, the works. Fun, fun, fun.
Back to Brian's around 1:30 till 3AM with a few people, then to bed.
Sunday, not as painful, pretty much a hang out day. Dropped Omar and Astraya off at the airport, had a shrimp cocktail snack, it's hot like nobody's business, up to 105 down here. Shikes. Cooked up our fish (about 1/4 of it served 6 of us!), felt like a man!
Sunday around 8PM pack the kids and pam in the car and head back to Corpus. On the way, nearly have a head-on collision with an idiot trying to pass a semi. Scared the poop out of us...I just held 'er steady and let him pass us--head-on-- on our right! Pam calls 911 and tells on the idiot.
Around 10:30 get to CC and grab a Holiday Inn.
Monday (today), about 5AM, alarm starts going off...need to catch a 6:55 flight to ATL. No problems, drag ourselves there and hop on the plane. About 11, show up in ATL and head home to drop the kids in daycare so I can run errands (car registration, groceries, laundry, car inspection...oh, and test drove an '01 Z06 vette...very fun, but they want $36K for it...).
Tomorrow, back to work...
Friday, 4:30 AM. Brian grabs Cliff (who fell off the wagon (14months worth) the night before and was a hurtin' unit) and me up. Drove to Leguna Somethinguna where we jumped on board with skipper Janey. She was a blast. Sun was still down, but we set out. Fished until around 1:30, caught about 15 trout, 1 red fish, and I nailed a flounder (ugly damn fish). Drank a couple beers and got damn hot.
Friday after making it back to the house, got ready and went over to Aunt Judy's for a night of celebrating with kids and full family. Judy has an amazing party house, with a pool and a party building (pool table, foosball table, the works. Kids had so much fun in the pool. Drank beer (not the kids...) and then went back to Brian's place. Drank a buttload of tequilla (brian had jiggers rather than shot glasses, so those 4 shots were really 6!). Got yelled at by Pam for being loud, and then passed out around 2:30AM.
Saturday morning --- ouch...breakfast, ouch, a couple hour nap, and then back into action. Prepare for the adult party which was held at a bar on the Rio Grande river overlooking Mexico. Great location, but damn hot. Drank, danced, roasted brian, the works. Fun, fun, fun.
Back to Brian's around 1:30 till 3AM with a few people, then to bed.
Sunday, not as painful, pretty much a hang out day. Dropped Omar and Astraya off at the airport, had a shrimp cocktail snack, it's hot like nobody's business, up to 105 down here. Shikes. Cooked up our fish (about 1/4 of it served 6 of us!), felt like a man!
Sunday around 8PM pack the kids and pam in the car and head back to Corpus. On the way, nearly have a head-on collision with an idiot trying to pass a semi. Scared the poop out of us...I just held 'er steady and let him pass us--head-on-- on our right! Pam calls 911 and tells on the idiot.
Around 10:30 get to CC and grab a Holiday Inn.
Monday (today), about 5AM, alarm starts going off...need to catch a 6:55 flight to ATL. No problems, drag ourselves there and hop on the plane. About 11, show up in ATL and head home to drop the kids in daycare so I can run errands (car registration, groceries, laundry, car inspection...oh, and test drove an '01 Z06 vette...very fun, but they want $36K for it...).
Tomorrow, back to work...
Monday, June 02, 2003
So, how to apply computers to computing...and really both of my points previously (the id of the computer and software visualization) are finding ways to make the computer more useful to itself. Why is it so hard for a computer to self-recover? IBM's autonomous computing is drilling at that idea. But are they going in the right direction?
Ooh, what if we think about a dual processor, not as things to co-process, but rather as two semi-independent hemispheres. Or, alternatively, what if we used one processor as the 'concious' element of the computer and dedicated the second to be the 'subconscious'? Dedicated processing could go on that would help put context and add the relationships to the events happening in the other hemisphere....
Interesting thought...
Ooh, what if we think about a dual processor, not as things to co-process, but rather as two semi-independent hemispheres. Or, alternatively, what if we used one processor as the 'concious' element of the computer and dedicated the second to be the 'subconscious'? Dedicated processing could go on that would help put context and add the relationships to the events happening in the other hemisphere....
Interesting thought...
Monday morning....
Dr. appt this morning to check my blood. See if my good fat level is better and see if the lipitor has done any good. Hopefully the exercising has been helping as well.
Okay, so thinking more about it, I'll use this area to jot down some ideas and try to expand on them...
Why haven't computers been turned fully on the question fo computing? Or have they and I am just not aware of it. We tend to apply computing to all sorts of problems, but not near enough on the problem of computing. Computers for computing sake.
Especially when thinking about thinking. How can computers help us figure this out? I'm very interested in this area...the positronic brain, Data, etc. But have we really put computers to task on this? I don't know, but I intend to find out.
Dr. appt this morning to check my blood. See if my good fat level is better and see if the lipitor has done any good. Hopefully the exercising has been helping as well.
Okay, so thinking more about it, I'll use this area to jot down some ideas and try to expand on them...
Why haven't computers been turned fully on the question fo computing? Or have they and I am just not aware of it. We tend to apply computing to all sorts of problems, but not near enough on the problem of computing. Computers for computing sake.
Especially when thinking about thinking. How can computers help us figure this out? I'm very interested in this area...the positronic brain, Data, etc. But have we really put computers to task on this? I don't know, but I intend to find out.
Sunday, June 01, 2003
With 3.4 out of the way (almost anyway), and ISS targeted to be complete the middle of June (all the work should be done now), and SAS 70 out of the way, I should be able to start thinking again.
3.8 looks to be a trio of sprints, with John managing them, I should be able to really open up a bit about how we are doing things at least beyond the 1 month horizon.
In particular, I want to make a roadmap for my eventual phd. I'm meeting with Jim Foley in a couple of weeks to get his thoughts on the matter.
My thinking is this:
1) Begin writing
2) Get articles published
3) Get articles in a referreed journal
4) Begin the conference tour
5) Determine my target thesis
6) Locate primary, secondar, tertiary school and prof to partner with
7) Do whatever it takes to get into one of these
Now, the hard part is balancing this with family and nuBridges. The goal is to align at least the writing and thesis with nuBridges such that they can be complimentary rather than at odds. This shouldn't be difficult in that there are a lot of areas that could be directly impacted within the nuBridges scope.
3.8 looks to be a trio of sprints, with John managing them, I should be able to really open up a bit about how we are doing things at least beyond the 1 month horizon.
In particular, I want to make a roadmap for my eventual phd. I'm meeting with Jim Foley in a couple of weeks to get his thoughts on the matter.
My thinking is this:
1) Begin writing
2) Get articles published
3) Get articles in a referreed journal
4) Begin the conference tour
5) Determine my target thesis
6) Locate primary, secondar, tertiary school and prof to partner with
7) Do whatever it takes to get into one of these
Now, the hard part is balancing this with family and nuBridges. The goal is to align at least the writing and thesis with nuBridges such that they can be complimentary rather than at odds. This shouldn't be difficult in that there are a lot of areas that could be directly impacted within the nuBridges scope.
okay, so now the question is how to get published. Perhaps I should take a single topic and start drilling in. Looking for places to publish, and places to make my opinion known.
The best bet is to take something like #1 and just start writing. But it would be good to have a couple of targets in mind. By the end of the week, I want to have a good list of potential targets prioritized and correlated with potential articles.
The best bet is to take something like #1 and just start writing. But it would be good to have a couple of targets in mind. By the end of the week, I want to have a good list of potential targets prioritized and correlated with potential articles.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
