Archive
Difference between math and science competitions
By James H. Choi
http://Column.SabioAcademy.com
Source URL
Ten years ago, it was not uncommon for parents interested in education to not know what the AMC (American Math Competition) was. It is not unreasonable to say that there are more math teachers in the U.S. who do not know what AMC is than those who do, not even 10 years ago, but even now, AMC is known only to a select few. At that time, it was considered a record to be proud of because it was rare for Korean students to score high in math competitions, but now it is common to go to AIME, and I personally know several students who went to AIME in 8th grade, so not having an AIME record is a disadvantage.
Awareness of science competitions is not yet as widespread among Korean parents as it is in math. Indian students realize the importance and participate early on because many of them are the children of parents who work in science and engineering. When I was a judge at the ISEF six years ago, there were very few Korean students, but many Indian students, and the judges, then and now, don’t look Korean, but many Indian. The most outstanding student I mentor now is also a talented and motivated Indian student. But judging from the inquiries I’m getting, I think Korean parents are starting to recognize the importance of the science fair.
Although the science contest and the math contest are the same, there are many differences between them, so it will be helpful to know the following differences and prepare for the contest.
- No written questions For math competitions, you can prepare by looking at the questions and explanations. However, science competitions do not have such a problem, and it is plagiarism to copy the previous research.
- Winners are announced on the day. While math competitions like AMC make you wait weeks to receive your scores, science competitions, with few exceptions, award winners on the same day as the regional/state competition. This can be exciting, but it can also be frustrating. Don’t get caught up in the frenetic pace of the process and keep a cool head.
- There are no right answers or explanations In math competitions, there is a right and wrong answer, just like math, but in science competitions, you have to evaluate research that approaches different topics in different ways, and especially when it comes to choosing the overall winner, you have to compare fields as far apart as math and psychology to determine superiority, so there are no clear criteria and you have to rely on the judges’ “gut feeling”. There are probably enough cases where the same judges could come back the next day to review the same research and come to a completely different decision. The unpredictability is compounded by the time pressure of the awards ceremony.
- Luck is a big factor The outcome depends on who is judging on the day of the competition and how they are judging. If you are doing particularly high-quality research, you need to have judges who recognize it, otherwise you will be indistinguishable from a student who copied a few Google results.
- You have to present in person, one-on-one. While math competitions are a solitary struggle, science competitions are all about being able to convince others. Every judge is a one-on-one test to convince the doubters of your excellence. Students who are shy or hesitant will unknowingly lose points because they have to answer questions from aggressive adults who are suddenly trying to find fault with them. If you are not naturally a stage person, it is very important to practice public speaking.
- You need to be able to write a science report. As you move up the evaluation stages, you will be evaluated through posters, interviews, and reports. Since it is not considered comprehensively but evaluated as one step at a time, the weakest link among the poster, interview, and report ends up being the culprit. Science reports are different from general essays in terms of order, format, and tone, and equations must be used. Since this cannot all be learned overnight, you must learn how to write a science report well in advance.
- Science competitions are zero-sum games and outcomes are relative. It’s not about how well you did, but it’s about how much better your research is than other research. Getting to AIME is not limited to how many people in your school can be at the AIME level, but science fairs are limited to a strict head-to-head comparison.
Science Fair Judging Procedure
By James H. Choi
http://Column.SabioAcademy.com
Source URL
Note: This is a column I wrote for the Chicago Tribune. Although it mentions a specific region by name, the process is similar in other regions, so I thought it would be helpful for all readers.
The science fair judging process varies from region to region, but Illinois Region 6, which covers Evanston to Barrington, has a three-step process for selecting students to advance to the International Science Fair (ISEF).
Some schools hold an in-school science fair to select their representative for external competitions. Schools like Niles North, Niles West, and Stevenson, which are very active in science research, have their own qualifying processes. You should check with your teacher to understand the specific procedures at your school.
For students at schools that do not prioritize science fairs, it may still be possible to compete as an individual without going through a qualification process, provided all procedures are followed and the science teacher approves.
Most public high schools in Region 6 (including Barrington, District 211, New Trier, Glenbrook North/South, etc.) do not allow students to represent their school in these competitions. However, there are opportunities to compete independently for students passionate about science, and we can provide more information on how to proceed.
In Virginia, many high schools require all Honors-level and advanced students to engage in science research. These students often participate in intramural qualifiers, which are highly competitive, before advancing to regional science competitions.
The students who make it to the regional competitions are judged in three stages.
The first type of judge is the Floor Judge, who interviews students on-site in front of their posters. Their primary role is to ensure that everything is in order, verify that the student understands the principles of scientific research, and evaluate the quality of the project. If the Floor Judge considers the project flawless and of a high standard, they will take on of the student’s reports. However, if the report is not taken, the student will not be eligible to receive any awards.
Floor Judges come from a variety of backgrounds, which can greatly influence the evaluation process. In some regions of the United States, Floor Judges may include university professors, while in others, they might be non-scientific volunteers. In Illinois Region 6, for example, Floor Judges are typically parents and middle or high school teachers.
This diversity in judging backgrounds means that evaluations can vary widely, especially for students conducting advanced research. A judge without a strong scientific background may not fully grasp the complexities of high-level projects. In such cases, evaluations may focus on more accessible factors, such as the student’s ability to clearly explain his/her work, the thoroughness of the research, and the overall impression the project leaves. This highlights the importance of presenting research in a way that is both thorough and easy to understand for a broad audience.
The second stage is the Best of Category judging, which is mainly composed of school teachers. There are three or four judges per category, and since there are more than ten categories, there are dozens of them. They sit around a table per category and read the reports in turn, selecting the two best students in each category. At first, we wait for the floor judges to send in their reports, and then they start coming in one by one, and then we start working. There are many ways to do this, but for me, I just picked the two best reports that I received and then when a new report came in, we discussed whether it was better than the previous two to determine the top two. It is important to note that these Best of Category judges do not meet the student, which means that no matter how well prepared your presentation is and how complete your poster is, it will only be seen by the Floor Judge, and from this point on, you will be judged 100% on the report.
The third and final step is the selection of students for ISEF. This year, we decided to invite only Ph.D.s in science and engineering, so we asked local universities to help us, but they only sent one professor each from the University of Chicago and Northwestern University, so we ended up with four people, including me. How many students are selected depends on the budget. ISEF does not allow students to compete at their own expense, so they must apply at local science fairs. This year, we sent five researchers. This step is also done without meeting the students, but by reading their reports. Each discipline sends two Best of Category reports, which is more than 20 copies. If you do the math, you can imagine how fast-paced the process is, as we have to read and discuss these reports within two hours to select the best students. Therefore, when writing your report, you should take that into account and try to make it as easy to understand as possible by using shapes for every concept so that the judges can understand it at a glance.
Regional Science Competition Judging Review
By James H. Choi
http://Column.SabioAcademy.com
Source URL
Note: This article was contributed to the Chicago JoongAng Daily in 2014. The details describe the story at the time, but the content is still useful today, so I will post it again in 2025.
Last Saturday, the Illinois Region 6 Science Fair took place. I served as a judge for the ISEF this year, which means that I have the important task of selecting the five best research papers from hundreds of submissions to advance to the international competition ISEF. This task is important because it can affect the life paths of the five selected students. The five students whose research I selected, along with professors from the University of Chicago and Northwestern University, will receive full support, including transportation, to participate in the International Science Fair to be held in Los Angeles in May. Students who have attended this competition unanimously describe it as a “life-changing experience,” and the changes are evident even to observers. Students who have spent a week immersed in a world where scientists, including Nobel Prize winners, are celebrated as heroes develop a pride in science that surpasses the pride our children feel as Koreans after visiting Korea. They will no longer fear being labeled as nerds or geeks but instead will take pride in their love of science.
This overall motivation alone is highly desirable, but the practical benefits are even greater. First of all, the positive effect on college admissions is enormous. In my personal experience, more than half of my students who have advanced to ISEF or STS have been accepted to universities at the level of MIT or Princeton. Three students who did not win an ISEF award were immediately scouted as interns in the labs of judges during the judging process. It is not uncommon for students I judged at ISEF to recognize each other in the hallways of MIT or Harvard years later.
That’s not all. If you have this kind of experience, even after you are accepted to college, you will have opportunities at a completely different level than your classmates. For example, one student, despite his status as a freshman, is working in MIT’s computer vision laboratory where graduate students work. When I asked how he got in, he said that he got a job at the computer vision lab because his ISEF computer vision award was recognized. From the very beginning of his first year of college, he has already started a career that is different from that of his classmates who are working as teaching assistants or helping with administrative tasks, and in the world of the “Matthew Effect,” this gap will only widen.
And what better education can prepare students for life in a modern economy that emphasizes “original ideas” and “your own color” than the experience of pursuing your own research from the beginning in high school, where you are rewarded for your success and the opportunities that open up for you?
The judges have opened the door for some students to take their first steps into this wonderful world. Isn’t it a huge responsibility to decide which students are most qualified to benefit from this!
For the past six years, only students from Niles West and Niles North high schools have studied at that level, but this year, students from two other high schools have advanced to ISEF. Judging from the last names of the students, it seems that there are two Korean students among them. Korean parents have been only aware of the math competition and have been indifferent to the science competition, but that may be starting to change.
The judges have opened the door to this wonderful world for some students. What a responsibility it is to decide which of the most qualified students will receive this privilege!
For the past six years, only students from Niles West and Niles North high schools have made it to that level of study, but this year, students from two other high schools have advanced to ISEF. Judging from the last names of the students, I think there are two Korean students among them. Korean parents have been indifferent to the science competition, but that may be changing.
For students who want to go to a competitive college, this science competition is one of the best academic activities that can provide motivation, a formal record of activity, and practical improvement at the same time. And compared to other regions I know, the competition in Region 6, where many of this newspaper’s readers live, is not yet at the level of fierce competition. There are many studies that are reluctantly done because they were told to do them at school, and there are also studies that were wasted time because they didn’t know the basics, so although there are many students who participate, studies with unique and fresh ideas that can be confidently submitted to ISEF are still rare. Therefore, just like in other regions, if children of professors and doctors start submitting their work en masse, the rest will be left empty handed and watch the opportunities slip away. However for now, being born as a scientist in Region 6 is still an “easy” opportunity that is fully achievable. Parents who are well-versed in science and engineering are advised to focus on guiding their children’s research activities rather than test scores so that their children can enjoy their studies and follow a wise path that is also recognized. Also, in the years when your child participates, you can volunteer as a judge for Region 6 to contribute to the local community and have the double effect of preparing your child more thoroughly for the following year.
Scientific research without experiments
By James H. Choi
http://Column.SabioAcademy.com
Source URL
When we think of “scientists,” we often think of someone wearing a white coat and holding a test tube. When I was getting my master’s degree, I worked in a signal processing lab, and this “lab” was nothing more than a computer on each desk, and I didn’t have to wear a white coat, so I still remember thinking, “What kind of lab is this?” while working in the lab. But in this era of big data, there’s a lot more science that doesn’t involve labs and white coats.
For starters, when we think of a “scientist,” we think of the iconic figure of Albert Einstein, who sat at a desk in a patent office with no computer, no lab, and only a pencil and paper, doing Nobel Prize-winning research. This is the true story of Einstein. “Theoretical physics” is literally a theoretical discipline, so we don’t do experiments. It’s better not to do it than to do it.
Theoretical physicists use the tools of math like a telescope/microscope to look at the universe and the insides of atomic nuclei to discover new things, and then, decades later, when technology improves, experimental physicists do experiments to see if the theories are right or wrong. Einstein’s gravitational lensing was theorized in 1916, but it wasn’t confirmed until nearly 100 years later. There is no theoretical physics research that middle and high school students can do. But with a computer and some imagination, you can find and solve problems that no one has thought of yet. For example, recently there was an article in the news that said, “An asteroid has been found to have a ring,” and while it is well known that planets as large as Mercury have rings, it is a shocking new discovery that an asteroid only a few kilometers in diameter could have rings. A student who has studied physics and programming can think of a theory like “How can a small asteroid have a ring?” and conduct an “experiment” by running the computer all night long, and as a result, enter it in a science fair. It’s not for everyone, of course, because it requires knowledge, but for students who have learned math, physics, and programming beforehand, it’s a way to show off their skills to the envious eyes of their classmates.
Pure math is also a highly developed field that is inaccessible to middle and high school students, but with computers, not only is it accessible, but you can create new problems and find answers, or you can just irresponsibly say, “Here’s a fun problem,” and leave it unanswered. That’s a conjecture, and in middle and high school, you can enter a science fair just by coming up with a creative conjecture. A few years ago, an eighth grader won first place in the math portion of the Illinois State Science Fair, beating out all the high school students, and his research was an extension of the Collatz Conjecture, meaning that he won first place by not only not solving Collatz’s problem, but finding out that there were more problems.
In a field like meteorology, if you want to study temperature changes over the past few hundred years, you have to use data that has been recorded by others, so you get the data and analyze it without experimentation. In astronomy, you can make your own telescope measurements, but a lot of data from advanced astronomical telescopes can be downloaded for free and analyzed, so unless you’re doing a very specific study, you don’t have to stay up at night hoping for a clear sky. When I was judging the physics category at an international science fair, there were students who measured the data directly and students who downloaded it, so I watched with interest, but in the end, only the student who downloaded it won. I thought that if the other students had analyzed the existing data during the observation time, they might have won.
Moving on to medicine, clinical trials are not something you can afford to do, and sometimes you can’t get approved even if you just try to read palms. For example, my student had to abandon her study “Do palms predict life expectancy?” because her school’s IRB (Institutional Review Board) wouldn’t allow her to read palms. She wanted to go to a nursing home to identify palm characteristics of people who lived long lives. The research proposal for “The relationship between blood type and personality” started with the intention of proving that there was no correlation, but the school said that “it could cause family discord” and did not approve it. At the same time, I learned that in the US, most students do not know their own blood type, so it is not as simple as I thought.
In contrast, the strategy of downloading and analyzing clinical trial data for free requires no permission, no equipment, and no time, so you can start analyzing from day one and focus on the research itself.
One thing to avoid is research that requires you to go to a specific lab and get permission to use someone else’s machine, which means you have to coordinate your time with theirs, and the machine is only available during orchestra concerts and final exams. There’s also the risk of the machine breaking down right before the deadline and making the world turn upside down, and the possibility that something is fundamentally wrong with the data I’m measuring and I have to start over, such as realizing in hindsight that it’s contaminated or out of calibration.
In this era of big data, there is a lot of free scientific data available for each specialty, and a lot of data that you can measure yourself at home with things like a digital camera, so it’s a smart strategy to avoid all the time/cost/risk of experimentation and instead find data in your field of interest and learn how to analyze it, because it’s scientist-like preparation and maximizes your odds in many ways.
Musicology Research with Mathematica 9
Musicology Research with Mathematica 9
By James H. Choi
http://column.SabioAcademy.com
Source Link
Mathematica 9 has one important new feature that is not even mentioned anywhere in bold fonts. It belongs to the “other” category of improvements that interests select few. Well, I am that select few who have been waiting version after version for this feature.
This new feature is ground-breaking-ly for those who are interested in analysis of compositions. For example, can you algorithmically recognize if a composition is by Bach? Or more scientifically speaking, can you calculate Bach-liness score for a piece of music?
We know it can be done because, paraphrasing a Supreme Court Justice on an unrelated case: “We know it when we hear it.”
But there is the first obstacle. How do we enter the musical score into the computer? One can scan music scores and recognize the notes and rests. That’s exactly what my student Hyunjoon Song did, and he won the 4th place at ISEF in 2011 with that research. But, as his mentor, I know what he has done still needs a great deal of improvement before we can start scanning scores of different sizes/fonts/styles.
What is more intriguing is that most of classical music pieces are already in computer readable format called MIDI (Musical Instrument Digital Interface) file format. In other words Book↔Text File and Music↔MIDI file. Every single note’s pitch and duration will be ready to be analyzed by your algorithm if you can import MIDI file. “If” you can import, that is.
Mathematica has been able to export into MIDI for some time. That’s how Hyunjoon Song above exported the result of his musical score recognition into MIDI and used a common media player to play it for the judges.
With Mathematica 9, finally you can import MIDI files: http://reference.wolfram.com/mathematica/ref/format/MIDI.html
This opens a wide gate for many research topics for those who are passionate about music and science at the same time.
Do you want to teach computers to measure your favorite composer’s greatness? Now you have all the tools. All you need is your insight and ability to teach the computer to act on your insight: algorithm programming. The best tool for it is now clear. It is Mathematica 9.
Korean version: Mathematica 9으로 하는 음악 연구
Sabio Column 