Projektityö kurssi 2016-17 päätökseen

Tämän lukuvuoden projektityökurssi on lopputoimia vailla valmis. Viime perjantaina nähtiin kurssin loppuesitykset. Tänä vuonna opiskelijoita oli 74 ja näin ollen projekteja pääsi toteuttamaan 13 ryhmää, joista 12 projektia pääsi aivan maaliin asti. Kolmen jakson eli noin viiden kuukauden tiukan puurtamisen jälkeen opiskelijat esittelivät hyvin onnistuneiden projektiensa tuloksia. Töitä projekteissa tehtiin erilaisilla tuntimäärillä, keskimääräisen tuntimäärän ollessa kuitenkin noin 218 tuntia opiskelijaa kohden. Koko kurssin toteutunut tuntimäärä yhteensä on noin 15500 tuntia. Tämän ja ensi viikon aikana on projektiryhmillä vielä vihonviimeinen puristus loppupalavereiden muodossa. Loppupalavereissa käydään läpi saavutettu tuote, mutta erityisesti projekti, sen kulku ja opit.

Kaikista projekteista ”vain” kaksi joutui fokusoimaan projektin sisältöä kesken kurssin. Ensimmäinen niistä, varmaankin johtuen varhaisesta projektin vaiheesta, suoriutui uudella projektiaiheella onnistuneesti. Toinen näistä uudelleen fokusoiduista projekteista ei valitettavasti selvinnyt kunnialla aivan maaliin asti. Tämänkin projektin epäonnistumisen opit otettiin loppuesityspäivänä opiskelijoiden keskuudessa hyvin vastaan ja se voittikin opiskelijoiden äänestämänä parhaan loppuesityksen palkinnon. Sanotaanhan usein, että vain virheitä tekemällä oppii.

Kurssin ja projektien statistiikasta sen verran, että projekteihin tehtyjä tunteja seurattiin viikkotasolla koko projektien eliniän ajan. Suurimmat projektit tunneissa mitattuina olivat luokkaa 1700 tuntia ja pienimmät noin 700 tuntia. Viikoittain seurattiin myös projektikohtaisesti keskimääräisten työtuntien määrää ja sen edistymistä (kuva alla), josta nähdään projektien keskimääräisen henkilökohtaisen tuntimäärän vaihdelleen 120 ja parhaimmillaan yli 300 tunnin välillä. Kuvasta voidaan nähdä ja näin jälkeen päinkin todeta, että alimman tuntimäärän saavuttaneet projektit ovat usein olleet vaikeuksissa projektin tavoitteiden saavuttamisessa. Näin oli myös tänä vuonna.

Uusina asioina kurssille tänä vuonna tulivat projektin seurannan työkaluksi projektikohtainen burnup-chart ja arviointiin palautettiin muutaman vuoden tauon jälkeen arvosteluasteikoksi perinteinen 0-5. Burnup-kaaviota kokeiltiin jo kesken edellisen kurssin toteutuksen, mutta silloin havaittiin sen olevan vaikeasti ymmärrettävä ja toteutettava opiskelijavetoisissa projekteissa. Tänä vuonna kaavio otettiin käyttöön uudelleen heti kurssin alussa ja sitä ohjeistettiin (välillä rautalankaakin vääntäen) useampaan kertaan kurssin aikana. Kaavion tuli esittää projektin lopputuotteen tehtäväjonon (backlog) kokoa, toteutuksen suunnittelua ja itse toteutusta pyrähdyksittäin (sprint). Tämä tieto lienee myös arvokasta dataa tuleville tutkimuksille aiheen tiimoilta. Uudistettu arvosanajärjestelmä perustui saavutettuihin pisteisiin (0-60p). Ne muodostuivat toteutetun projektin onnistumisesta ajallisesti ja laadullisesti (tekeminen ja lopputuote), asiakkaan antamasta palautteesta, sekä ns. henkilökohtaisesta osasta. Henkilökohtaisen osan elementit olivat opiskelijoiden ristiinarviointi ja kurssin henkilökunnan opiskelijoille antama henkilökohtaista suoriutumista kuvaava arvio.

Tämän vuoden kurssille ominaista oli kova työmäärä useimmissa projekteista, sillä esimerkiksi edelliseen vuoteen verrattuna opiskelijakohtainen keskimääräinen tuntimäärä nousi yli 20 tuntia.

Loppuesityspäivää olivat seuraamassa ja oppeja ammentamassa kaikki kurssin opiskelijat (kuva alla), kurssin henkilökunta, muuta laitoksen väkeä, asiakkaiden edustajia ja loppuesityspäivän sponsorin, OpusCapitan, edustajat. Opiskelijat saivat äänestää parhaan loppuesityksen. Parhaan loppuesityksen palkitsivat sekä kurssin henkilökunta, että sponsorin edustajat. Nämä parhaat esitykset palkittiin loppuesityspäivän perinteisessä iltajuhlassa Teekkarisaunalla. Myöhemmin kurssin henkilökunta arvioi mielestään parhaan projektin katsoen sitä lopputuotteen, projekti onnistumisen ja hallitun prosessin näkökulmista. Tämä ryhmä tultaneen perinteisesti palkitsemaan Pitky:n stipendillä.

Asiakaspalauteprosessi on vielä kesken, mutta jo nyt on havaittavissa asiakkaiden olleen tyytyväisiä saamiinsa tuloksiin, vaikka aina aivan kaikki alkuperäiset vaatimukset tuotteelle eivät toteutuneetkaan. Nähtyämme loppuesityspäivän tulokset voimme olla tyytyväisiä. Kurssi on saavuttanut tavoitteensa ja opiskelijat ovat oppineet paljon. Suuri kiitos kuuluu kaikille; opiskelijoille, asiakasyrityksille, sponsorille (OpusCapita) sekä kurssin henkilökunnalle!

Projektien opeista viisastuneena kevään odotusta kaikille,

Harri Sten, kurssin vastaava

Posted in teaching | Tagged | Leave a comment

Doctoral defence: the stand up edition

Timo’s lectio praecursoria

MSc Timo Lehtonen defended his doctoral thesis Metrics and Visualizations for Managing Value Creation in Continuous Software Engineering on Friday. Professor Hannu-Matti Järvinen acted as custos and the opponent professor Pekka Abrahamsson came from the Norwegian University of Science and Technology in Trondheim.

In his thesis, Timo developed novel metrics and visualisations on top of the data produced by the software development tools. The developed artifacts aim to help to understand and manage value creation in software teams. The metrics and visualisations developed make lean continuous improvement of the development process possible. In addition, the development organization can get new information on the process which is not otherwise easily available.

The defence itself provided an entertaining couple of hours with discussion that made the audience, which was quite significant for a defence, laugh while staying on point at the same time. Timo answered prof Abrahamsson’s questions well and defended his work thoroughly. We also got to see some visualisations.

First Timo took to the board and drew some visualisations…

…and then the opponent followed with his own take on visualisation.

All in all, we had a blast. Prof Abrahamsson will be back in May to act as an opponent once more. Make sure you don’t miss it. Congratulations Timo!

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Vanishing Point: Marko Leppänen’s doctoral defence 27.2.

On Friday 27.2. Marko Leppänen defended his work titled “Vanishing Point: Where Infrastructures, Architectures, and Processes of Software Engineering Meet”. For the last time at Pervasive Computing, professor Tommi Mikkonen acted as custos. Marko’s opponent was professor Heikki Saikkonen from Aalto University.

Marko’s work was on continuous delivery of software products. In his work Marko investigated  the relationship between the tool infrastructure needed, the development processes and the architecture of the software product. The thesis focused on the context of increasing the speed of delivery  combined with the idea of continuous feedback. The work also regarded the ramifications of rapid software delivery.

https://twitter.com/PervasiveTUT/status/824929450190106624

The defence was a master class on doctoral defences. The questions placed by the opponent were tough but fair and Marko answered very professionally and smoothly. The discussion, albeit short, was a true discussion among two software engineering researchers. The audience, and the custos even, enjoyed it wholeheartedly.  Congratulations Marko!

Posted in PhD thesis, research | Leave a comment

Exit words from Matti Vuori

Hi, “pervasivians” and others,

This department is like any other in the sense that people enter and leave often without any notice. At least many new workers are announced via this blog — which is an improvement over how things were when I arrived. But of those who leave, we rarely hear a thing. Today is the last day of my contract, so here are a couple of last words from me. This is not a proper post mortem, only only some notes that could be of “human interest”.

I joined you 5,5 years ago, for three reasons. First, that was the darkest time ever in the ICT job market in Tampere and I had been laid out from one company, which left little interest in the then very depressed, apathetic private sector. I knew docent Mika Katara, who invited me to TUT to work on a project about development of safety-critical systems for a couple of months. After that the job continued as a teaching associate, with the main focus of working in research projects and in teaching software testing, with a requirement of doing a dissertation on the side. The third reason for joining the department was that I was interested to see what the department does and how they do it. I was particularly interested in joining a workplace with professor Ilkka Haikala, whom I had learned to know a little before, but unknown to me, he had passed recently. That is one lesson to every expert organisation: is is good to have interesting gurus that tempt outsiders, especially at times when there are no fantastic domains of activity.

Now the contract, with a small extension, is done, just as is the dissertation about testing competences that respond to the changes in our environment (the defense following later) – well, actually it is just as much about product development competences, which start in the development of great concepts. Also the local private sector seems very much alive – both in business sense and psychologically it is active and energetic. So it is a good time to leave.

The good things here were the opportunity to use my knowledge in teaching and in research, the new learnings from TUT and Inforte seminars about topics varying from patenting via startups to cognitive computing, and the involvement in developing the university collaboration with Demola in the InnoPilotti project, as well as many other things. The whole world is now hyped about robots and in one project  we reseacher using them for testing.

Oh, one thing to mention is that when I arrived at TUT, Tensu soon asked me to enter, after him, as TUT’s representative the board of Pitky, which I’m currently chairing. It has been nice – and has given the opportunity to arrange the TUT/Pitky collaborative Testauspäivä a couple of times. Now TUT should get a slot in the board as I’m not representing you. TUT understands the importance of local collaboration with industry better than any other university and Pitky has always been an important operative and symbolic channel for that (societies and individuals live off symbols and meanings). “Act local” is the final and brightest measure of science and maintaining good practices is the measure of civilisation.

Ok, so that’s that. Now I’ll need to find work in somewhere else.

Thanks and goodbye to all,

Matti Vuori

http://www.mattivuori.net
matti.vuori@mattivuori.net
Twitter: @Matti_Vuori
050 3605429

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Hyvää joulua! Happy holidays!

Laitoksella arkinen aherrus alkaa hiljetä, kun tutkijat ja opettajat suuntaavat joulua juhlimaan. Ahkerin saa vielä huomenaamulla avata luukun 23 laitosta ilahduttaneesta joulukalenterista, mutta 24. luukku taitaa jälleen jäädä jo perinteiseksi arvoitukseksi, ehkä jopa ensi vuoteen saakka.

Hyvää joulua!

Hyvää joulua ensi vuoden kalenteria odotellen!

Adventtikalenterin myötä Tietotekniikan laitos toivottaa kaikille hyvää joulua ja iloista uutta vuotta 2017. Suurkiitos yhteistyökumppaneille kuluvasta vuodesta.

The Department of Pervasive Computing wishes everybody Happy Holidays and a Happy New Year 2017.

Posted in wishes | Leave a comment

Warm thanks to guest lecturers on software testing course!

The software testing course was once again held this fall. As usual, there were guest lectures by people from various companies and organizations.

This year we had great lectures from Arto Stenberg from Symbio, Antti Kervinen from Intel, Tuomas Lunti from Nokia, Kaisa Tirkkonen from Kela and Juha-Markus Aalto from Qentinel.

Warmest thank you for all the guest lecturers!

BR,

Antti Jääskeläinen & course staff

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

INFORTE workshop on Artificial Cognition

Our department hosted the INFORTE workshop on Artificial Cognition on 1.-2.12.2016. The workshop’s main organizer was our professor emeritus Kai Koskimies, who became interested in bio-inspired computing related topics during his last years in active work.

acsemma-kaitsu

Prof. Kai Koskimies opening the workshop

The two-day workshop was divided roughly into two – during the first day the experts gave introductions and tutorials into their topics, while the second day was reserved for applications and more advanced discussions. Both days ended with an hour long panel discussion.

The first talk was given by Prof. David Vernon from University of Skövde, Sweden, as he took us through an “Extreme Tutorial” to Artificial Cognition. Prof. Vernon returned to the stage later in the day, as he had agreed to also take care of  Prog. Giulio Sandini’s topics, as prof. Sandini had had to cancel his participation at the last minute. 4 presentations in 2 days then for Prof. Vernon, we applaude him!

Prof. David Vernon

Prof. David Vernon

The second talker was Prof. Marja-Leena Linne from TUT, who works in neuroscience. She concentrated on the biological aspects of cognition, with her talk “Neurobiology of learning”.

wp_000349

Prof. Marja-Leena Linne

The last talk was given by Prof. Steven Furber, from University of Manchester, whose topic was intelligent machines.

Prof. Steven Furber

Prof. Steven Furber

 

The organizers wanted to call this a workshop instead of a seminar to encourage discussions, and they succeeded in that. The fully-booked workshop had a very lively and participating audience, and all talkers got to answer questions both during and after their presentations.  There also rarely was a straightforward answer to a question within this topic, so one question lead to many more and there was interesting discussions and even debates going on throughout the two days.

wp_000374 wp_000361

The finale for the workshop was the closing panel where the topic was nothing less than “Future of intelligent machines”.  At 4 pm on a dark November Friday, after two days of intense workshopping and powerpoint slides one might expect that there is no energy left to discuss, but so it went that the one hour timeslot was not even enough.

Prof. Koskimies leading the panel

Prof. Koskimies leading the panel

 

Posted in events | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Algorithms, Software design and Project planning, all wrapped into one PhD thesis

Friday 2.12.2016 was the day for MSc Sriharsha “Harsha” Vathsavayi’s thesis defence. The title of the thesis was “Applying Genetic Algorithms for Software Design and Project Planning”.

Opponent Prof. Ivan Porres, kustos Prof. Kari Systä and the PhD candidate Sriharsha Vathsavayi

Opponent Prof. Ivan Porres, kustos Prof. Kari Systä and the PhD candidate Sriharsha Vathsavayi

In practice, Harsha had used said algorithms to automate software design by automatically finding optimal configurations of software architecture patterns. He had then added project planning to the picture by also considering work allocation to teams and scheduling alongside the software design. On top of that, Harsha had added the concept of distance so the approach was applicable to distributed software development where the work would be done at different sites. The work included developing quite a complicated tool to work with the algorithm and all the architectural and project planning concepts.

While the topic of the thesis may seem wide, using the words of the opponent, Professor Ivan Porres from Åbo Akademi, Harsha had “elegantly combined all these themes” to make a coherent thesis.

Harsha had already practiced his defence in the rehearsal defence (arranged and blogged about 2 weeks ago), and we could clearly see that practice makes perfect, as he very smoothly delivered answers to all the opponent had to ask.

harshanvaitos1_pien

Congratulations Harsha!

Posted in PhD thesis, research, thesis worker | Leave a comment

Profes’16: a Norwegian Take on Product Focused Software Process Improvement

At the end of November, our researchers focusing on modern software systems development and engineering headed to lovely Trondheim to attend the 17th international conference on product-focused software process improvement, or PROFES. While our flight there did not go according to plan when a delayed flight rerouted our entire five researcher delegation from TUT out of Stockholm first to Oslo and then, finally, to Trondheim, the conference was amazing!

Nidaros Cathedral by early morning pictured by one early bird member of Pervasive running team

Nidaros Cathedral by early morning pictured by one early bird member of Pervasive running team. Yes! it was THAT dark a seven AM.

We had researchers contributing to four papers (our contributors are emboldened)…

  • Eight Paths of Innovations in a Lean Startup Manner: A Case Study by Mikko Raatikainen, Marko Komssi, Harri Kiljander, Laura Hokkanen, Jukka Märijärvi and Omar Mohout.
  • Log File Analyzing in
Intelligent Transportation Systems Development by Esa Heikkinen and Timo D. Hämäläinen.
  • The Developers Dilemma: Perfect Product Development or Fast Business Validation? by Henri Terho, Sampo Suonsyrjä and Kari Systä.
  • Supporting management of hybrid OSS communities – A stake-holder analysis approach by Hanna Mäenpää, Tero Kojo, Terhi Kilamo, Myriam Munezero, Mikko Nurminen, Tomi Männistö and Fabian Fagerholm

…and a poster

  • Internationally Distributed Software Development: On the Impact of Distance Based on a Case Study by Harri Sten, Hannu Jaakkola and Kari Systä.

So all in all a very solid performance! Especially prof. Tommi Mikkonen saved the day when one researcher fell ill right before the conference. He delivered a perfect talk from his student’s paper.

The conference also provided good opportunities to network with other researchers for example by a Pokemon printing 3D-printer or a magician with a few cards (and a scary Houdini trick) up his sleave.

You can see many great photos of the conference here. Try to spot a familiar face!

Posted in conference, research | Leave a comment

Conference Tour of the Navigation (Sensor) Group

This is a three-in-one report about the conference trips of the Navigation (Sensor) Group in the Department of Pervasive Computing.

Our visiting researcher Jan Rácko made a great study on pedestrian navigation with smartphones and we published together a paper Pedestrian Dead Reckoning with Particle Filter for Handheld Smartphone (Collin, J. T., Perttula, A. S., Parviainen, J. T., Racko, J. & Brida, P. 4 Oct 2016 Proceedings of IPIN 2016 Conference) which Jan presented at IPIN 2016, in Madrid, Spain. IPIN has become maybe the best conference on indoor navigation and it was very good place to show what we are doing here at TUT.

Next week it was time to fly to Budabest, to IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics (SMC 2016), where Jussi Parviainen was presenting our inertial dice, with the paper entitled Real-time Implementation Of Dice Unloading Algorithm (Vassilyev, A., Parviainen, J., Collin, J. & Takala, J. 2016 2016 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics SMC 2016)

Random numbers and statistics sometimes involve tedious experiments. In the second half of 19th century there was Rudolf Wolf with 100 000 throws of a single die (result 16632, 17700, 15183, 14393, 17707, 18385), later there were books consisting only random numbers on sale. Then became computers and pseudorandom numbers that save a lot of work. But we wanted to go back a bit because 1) throwing dice is fun 2) pseudorandom numbers are pseudo. So we combined dice and computer using inertial sensors. Obviously attaching anything to dice makes it a bit unbalanced. To avoid performing 100 000 throws for correcting the bias we employed Neumann’s method. The method requires ~3 throws and then the computer gives a one single unbiased result.

Finally, Arto flew to Orlando to present a paper Pedestrian Detection with High Resolution Inertial Measurement Unit (Perttula, A. S., Parviainen, J. T. & Collin, J. T. 2016 IEEE Sensors Conference 2016) at IEEE Sensors 2016 conference. In this paper we used our 32-fold inertial measurement unit array to detect passengers on a bus. Inertial sensors are becoming very sensitive and we are interested on figuring out what kind of events we can recognize from the data. Passenger footsteps were detected successfully and the research continues. The work is related to the Living Lab Bus project.

Postprints of the papers will be in TUTCRIS soon.

Figure 1. Landscape at SMC2016, photo by Jussi Parviainen

Figure 2. IEEE president Barry L. Shoop at SMC2016 Opening Ceremony

Figure 3. Arto presenting a poster at SENSORS 2016

Text: Jussi Collin

Posted in conference, research | Tagged | Leave a comment