5 ms·

It matters what you're majoring in and focusing on. There's only so much time to teach so much material in CS, for example, and there's not much desire from the

It matters what you're majoring in and focusing on. There's only so much time to teach so much material in CS, for example, and there's not much desire from the faculty to teach numerical diff eq solving (and certainly none from most CS students to learn it). The ones that do go to grad school tend to need these more, but they haven't seen them in undergrad so they end up learning what they're lacking in grad school (or late undergrad). That said, do you guys really learn/teach the shooting method, Lagrange interpolation, predictor-corrector methods, QR factorization, etc. as 1st/2nd-year undergrads? For what majors? I feel like this would come at the cost of deferring other topics to later years.

physicsguy 6y ago
We don't generally have majors/minors in the UK, so perhaps this is part of it. You do a degree in for e.g. Maths/Physics/Mech Eng, and all of your courses are in that. Yes, we also covered other stuff like splines, finite difference method, too. I think Finite Element was third year where I last taught.
- dataflow 6y ago
  > You do a degree in for e.g. Maths/Physics/Mech Eng, and all of your courses are in that. "Major" refers to the same things you mentioned (physics, math, EE, etc.), it's not any different in the US. > Yes, we also covered other stuff like splines, finite difference method, too. I think Finite Element was third year where I last taught. Sorry to repeat the question, but again -- in what major (or "for what degree" in your terminology) did you study this? (CS? MechE? Physics? EE?)
  - physicsguy 6y ago
    My background is physics, but most recently was a TA for classes for people in Aero/Mech/Astronautical Engineering (courses were shared between all three programmes) doing this stuff. In that department, beyond the courses covering this stuff which were compulsory, there were additional optional courses for 3rd and 4th year students to do C programming and more advanced numerical methods and stuff like programming paradigms for HPC.
    - dataflow 6y ago
      Yeah, so I think this clears up why. I don't think that "serious undergraduates or graduate students" statement was aimed at physics folks, but at more like CS (and possibly EE) folks. Who would also normally learn (say) programming paradigms, algorithms, data structures, low-level programming like C, etc. in their first 1-2 years, which are topics I'm guessing you wouldn't be covering as physicists. For students in CS (or to some extent EE or more nearby fields) to go in this direction in their first 1-2 years, they'd need to have a very unusual amount of interest in numerical techniques to defer other basic topics to later years (or just overload on technical courses and defer humanities to later).
      - dron57 6y ago
        I did EE in Canada and numerical methods were definitely taught in 2nd year of undergrad. Why wouldn't it be?
        dataflow 6y ago
        I said possibly EE, not necessarily. Depends what you mean by "taught" and on what the program itself focuses on. In EE/CS programs you'd be taking half CS courses at least in the beginning, for example. And those EE courses' focuses are often on DSP and digital control rather than (say) simulating analog circuits. If by "taught" you mean "can be taken at that level", then sure, these are such undergrad courses in the US too, and they don't have particularly long prereq chains either, so a 2nd year student could take them if they actually wanted to. But it's not customary, and if by "taught" you mean required as part of the curriculum, it may not be depending on the school. The reasons are varied; again, lack of interest from CS-leaning folks on both sides is one such reason, as is the fact that the world has gone digital and they tend to focus more on linear algebra/DSP/etc. rather than ODEs and PDEs. In general few undergraduate students who aren't forced to take numerical methods in undergrad will do so. And I'm not saying this is a good or a bad thing or trying to justify it, just explaining how it is and what some of their rationales are.
        6y ago
  - coldtea 6y ago
    >"Major" refers to the same things you mentioned (physics, math, EE, etc.), it's not any different in the US. It is, if the UK doesn't have minors but only majors (e.g. you determine from the start what you'll be studing).
    - dataflow 6y ago
      Minors and majors are mutually exclusive. You don't minor in something if you major in it. Majors should be the same as in the UK. And yes you can determine from the start what you'll be studying in the US in many schools; just depends on the college policy.
      - coldtea 6y ago
        >And yes you can determine from the start what you'll be studying in the US in many schools Sure. But the question is "can you do the inverse in the UK?". That would be the difference then -- not having the ability to "play around" before settling.
        dataflow 6y ago
        The difference between what? The question was whether majors in the US mean the same thing as those things listed for the UK. I'm saying yes they do. The claim was never that other aspects of programs are identical in both countries.
        coldtea 6y ago
        Well, there is no equivalent of majors in the UK, so "majors in the US" can't "mean the same thing as those things listed for the UK". There are no majors in the UK, and no equivalents of the major/minor dichotomy. There is just a straight degree in X, studying topics about X. You don't get to decide your major later on, and you don't get to throw in a minor to your degree as well. You study a specific thing from the first year.
        6y ago
the_svd_doctor 6y ago
I learned those (not QR, but ODE methods, basic numerical PDE, non linear equation solving methods, interpolation, etc) in the first semester of my 2nd year of my engineering bachelor. In Belgium.
- bigger_cheese 6y ago
  Similar story here my Bachelor of Engineering degree in Australia covered Partial Differential Equations, Fourier Transforms, Interpolation, Eigen Vectors etc. The focus was on the mathematics and concepts. We were not taught how to approach these problems using computer code. We were taught very little computer programming in general. When we were taught how to solve problems using computer assistance the focus tended to be on using specific software packages and not on how to write code. I.e. using ANSYS for Fluid Dynamics problems or using Excel's "Solver" for simultaneous linear equations. Edit: QR Factorisation was covered in my first year Linear Alegbra course. For Matrix stuff we used software called "Maple" which was installed in computer lab at university I have never heard of it again since I left uni so I don't think it is all that common. We mostly had to solve problems by hand on paper anyway - which I hated.
  - physicsguy 6y ago
    They did the same sort of things for CFD, but on top of what I described above and in different courses. In the first year course they were using Solidworks Flow but went on to other stuff after that.
capeterson 6y ago
I'm about to graduate from a 4 year university in CA (edit: CS major) and we are taught a fairly in depth numerical methods class as part of our 3000 series of classes (i.e. it's intended for third-year students). It's certainly possible to take it in your second year where I am, but usually students opt for other classes that will help them get an internship before they go to numerical methods, so it's a common third year class IMO. It doesn't normally get pushed off farther than that though, since it's a common prerequisite for fourth year classes.
- physicsguy 6y ago
  We don't really have so many optional choices here early on - in UK Engineering degrees are regulated by the Engineering Council and have to cover set material, or students who graduate from it are not able to register for Chartered Engineer status as quickly (adds an extra 5 years onto the process). For Physics, the courses are generally set to meet requirements set by the Institute of Physics. We do have credits, but it's generally not possible for you to take courses from a higher level - a 2nd year student can't generally take a 3rd year course for e.g. or vice versa. In general, this means that the first two years of all physics/eng degrees in the UK cover almost identical material across all Universities. It's only after that you start to get any choice, and those choices usually relate somewhat to the expertise of the academics at that institution - I did my first degree in a University with very strong condensed matter theory group for e.g. so there were lots of courses on that.

physicsguy 6y ago

We don't generally have majors/minors in the UK, so perhaps this is part of it. You do a degree in for e.g. Maths/Physics/Mech Eng, and all of your courses are in that. Yes, we also covered other stuff like splines, finite difference method, too. I think Finite Element was third year where I last taught.

dataflow 6y ago
> You do a degree in for e.g. Maths/Physics/Mech Eng, and all of your courses are in that. "Major" refers to the same things you mentioned (physics, math, EE, etc.), it's not any different in the US. > Yes, we also covered other stuff like splines, finite difference method, too. I think Finite Element was third year where I last taught. Sorry to repeat the question, but again -- in what major (or "for what degree" in your terminology) did you study this? (CS? MechE? Physics? EE?)
- physicsguy 6y ago
  My background is physics, but most recently was a TA for classes for people in Aero/Mech/Astronautical Engineering (courses were shared between all three programmes) doing this stuff. In that department, beyond the courses covering this stuff which were compulsory, there were additional optional courses for 3rd and 4th year students to do C programming and more advanced numerical methods and stuff like programming paradigms for HPC.
  - dataflow 6y ago
    Yeah, so I think this clears up why. I don't think that "serious undergraduates or graduate students" statement was aimed at physics folks, but at more like CS (and possibly EE) folks. Who would also normally learn (say) programming paradigms, algorithms, data structures, low-level programming like C, etc. in their first 1-2 years, which are topics I'm guessing you wouldn't be covering as physicists. For students in CS (or to some extent EE or more nearby fields) to go in this direction in their first 1-2 years, they'd need to have a very unusual amount of interest in numerical techniques to defer other basic topics to later years (or just overload on technical courses and defer humanities to later).
    - dron57 6y ago
      I did EE in Canada and numerical methods were definitely taught in 2nd year of undergrad. Why wouldn't it be?
      - dataflow 6y ago
        I said possibly EE, not necessarily. Depends what you mean by "taught" and on what the program itself focuses on. In EE/CS programs you'd be taking half CS courses at least in the beginning, for example. And those EE courses' focuses are often on DSP and digital control rather than (say) simulating analog circuits. If by "taught" you mean "can be taken at that level", then sure, these are such undergrad courses in the US too, and they don't have particularly long prereq chains either, so a 2nd year student could take them if they actually wanted to. But it's not customary, and if by "taught" you mean required as part of the curriculum, it may not be depending on the school. The reasons are varied; again, lack of interest from CS-leaning folks on both sides is one such reason, as is the fact that the world has gone digital and they tend to focus more on linear algebra/DSP/etc. rather than ODEs and PDEs. In general few undergraduate students who aren't forced to take numerical methods in undergrad will do so. And I'm not saying this is a good or a bad thing or trying to justify it, just explaining how it is and what some of their rationales are.
        6y ago
- coldtea 6y ago
  >"Major" refers to the same things you mentioned (physics, math, EE, etc.), it's not any different in the US. It is, if the UK doesn't have minors but only majors (e.g. you determine from the start what you'll be studing).
  - dataflow 6y ago
    Minors and majors are mutually exclusive. You don't minor in something if you major in it. Majors should be the same as in the UK. And yes you can determine from the start what you'll be studying in the US in many schools; just depends on the college policy.
    - coldtea 6y ago
      >And yes you can determine from the start what you'll be studying in the US in many schools Sure. But the question is "can you do the inverse in the UK?". That would be the difference then -- not having the ability to "play around" before settling.
      - dataflow 6y ago
        The difference between what? The question was whether majors in the US mean the same thing as those things listed for the UK. I'm saying yes they do. The claim was never that other aspects of programs are identical in both countries.
        coldtea 6y ago
        Well, there is no equivalent of majors in the UK, so "majors in the US" can't "mean the same thing as those things listed for the UK". There are no majors in the UK, and no equivalents of the major/minor dichotomy. There is just a straight degree in X, studying topics about X. You don't get to decide your major later on, and you don't get to throw in a minor to your degree as well. You study a specific thing from the first year.
        6y ago

the_svd_doctor 6y ago

I learned those (not QR, but ODE methods, basic numerical PDE, non linear equation solving methods, interpolation, etc) in the first semester of my 2nd year of my engineering bachelor. In Belgium.

bigger_cheese 6y ago
Similar story here my Bachelor of Engineering degree in Australia covered Partial Differential Equations, Fourier Transforms, Interpolation, Eigen Vectors etc. The focus was on the mathematics and concepts. We were not taught how to approach these problems using computer code. We were taught very little computer programming in general. When we were taught how to solve problems using computer assistance the focus tended to be on using specific software packages and not on how to write code. I.e. using ANSYS for Fluid Dynamics problems or using Excel's "Solver" for simultaneous linear equations. Edit: QR Factorisation was covered in my first year Linear Alegbra course. For Matrix stuff we used software called "Maple" which was installed in computer lab at university I have never heard of it again since I left uni so I don't think it is all that common. We mostly had to solve problems by hand on paper anyway - which I hated.
- physicsguy 6y ago
  They did the same sort of things for CFD, but on top of what I described above and in different courses. In the first year course they were using Solidworks Flow but went on to other stuff after that.

capeterson 6y ago

I'm about to graduate from a 4 year university in CA (edit: CS major) and we are taught a fairly in depth numerical methods class as part of our 3000 series of classes (i.e. it's intended for third-year students). It's certainly possible to take it in your second year where I am, but usually students opt for other classes that will help them get an internship before they go to numerical methods, so it's a common third year class IMO. It doesn't normally get pushed off farther than that though, since it's a common prerequisite for fourth year classes.

physicsguy 6y ago
We don't really have so many optional choices here early on - in UK Engineering degrees are regulated by the Engineering Council and have to cover set material, or students who graduate from it are not able to register for Chartered Engineer status as quickly (adds an extra 5 years onto the process). For Physics, the courses are generally set to meet requirements set by the Institute of Physics. We do have credits, but it's generally not possible for you to take courses from a higher level - a 2nd year student can't generally take a 3rd year course for e.g. or vice versa. In general, this means that the first two years of all physics/eng degrees in the UK cover almost identical material across all Universities. It's only after that you start to get any choice, and those choices usually relate somewhat to the expertise of the academics at that institution - I did my first degree in a University with very strong condensed matter theory group for e.g. so there were lots of courses on that.