This plan is utterly wrongheaded and driven by fascination with overhyped buzzwords that the proponents of the plan do not understand.
T
Timothy Porter
5 years ago
Predicitng what aspects of the foundations of computer science will be applicable is a fools game, but some think they can play it.
N
Nathanaël Fijalkow
5 years ago
An absolutely stupid idea, that is
D
Dariusz Kowalski
5 years ago
Is the University of Leicester abandoning the university ethos and turning into a vocational school? After cutting off foundations of science, students won't be able to understand why things work, instead, will be blindly applying technology (and thus will be the first to be replaced by AI and robots on the market). Sad news.
A
António Ravara
5 years ago
Time and time again history shows "highly theoretical and not directly linked with applications" works leading to (sometimes really surprising) technological breakthroughs.
S
Sanjay Modgil
5 years ago
A sign of the times, in which financial and commercial imperatives ultimately dictate what is considered to be of value, so that fundamental research is being shut down by those who are ignorant of how theoretical advances have underpinned so many of the UK's contributions in science.
A
Amy Felty
5 years ago
Incredible that this could happen, As someone has already said in the comments: How can one remove the foundations of Computer Science upon which AI, DS et al. rely?
G
German Vidal
5 years ago
As already mentioned, ceasing the research in Foundations of Computer Science to focus on a more applied research is very short-sighted. Today's theoretical results lie the basis for tomorrow's applied developments. In particular, the Leicester group has recently coordinated a COST action focused on reversible computing (IC1405), that will undoubtedly have future applications in different fields.
H
Heiko Vogler
5 years ago
As my colleague Markus Lohrey wrote: "Also successful research in areas like AI, data science, computational modelling and digitalization needs a strong and broad base in mathematics and theoretical computer science."
If you cut down the latter, then you will not be successfull in the former.
Heiko Vogler, full professor
D
Daniel F Melia Professor emeritus UC Berkeley
5 years ago
A University is not a trade school.
S
Steffen Zschaler
5 years ago
Senior Lecturer in Computer Science, King's College London
Removing foundations of computing is a short-sighted decision: the ever increasing focus on near-term application and benefit will eventually reduce our ability to innovate by cutting us off the sound foundations without which no practical innovation can be created.
D
Davide Sangiorgi
5 years ago
Featured
Professor, University of Bologna (I) and INRIA (F)
An extremely short-sighted decision: you need Theory and Science to develop good applications.
Furthermore, the Foundations of
Computer Science (FoCo) group at Leicester is of very high quality
V
Vasilis Katos
5 years ago
Good grief
A
Anonymous
5 years ago
How can one remove the foundations of Computer Science upon which AI, DS et al. rely?
E
Elpida Keravnou-Papailiou
5 years ago
Foundations of Computer Science continue to be key to the development of sound informatics approaches
B
Benedict du Boulay
5 years ago
A very shortsighted decision - buildings need firm foundations as do computer science and AI.
L
Luca Paolini
5 years ago
It is a shame!
S
Shahab Tasharrofi
5 years ago
It seems short-sighted to me to cut on the proposed areas. Up until 15 years ago, one could have applied the same argument to the area of AI / machine learning and argue that the results there are not applicable at all.
The same way that history has shown this argument should not have been applied to AI / machine learning 15 years ago, I strongly believe that history will also show that this argument should not be applied to the area that you consider too theoretical today.
A
Artur d'Avila Garcez
5 years ago
Professor of Computer Science
M
Markus Lohrey
5 years ago
Also successful research in areas like AI, data science, computational modelling and digitalization needs a strong and broad base in mathematics and theoretical computer science.
Since the work of Newton and Leibniz one should know that technological progress is not possible without purely theoretical research.
This plan is utterly wrongheaded and driven by fascination with overhyped buzzwords that the proponents of the plan do not understand.
Predicitng what aspects of the foundations of computer science will be applicable is a fools game, but some think they can play it.
An absolutely stupid idea, that is
Is the University of Leicester abandoning the university ethos and turning into a vocational school? After cutting off foundations of science, students won't be able to understand why things work, instead, will be blindly applying technology (and thus will be the first to be replaced by AI and robots on the market). Sad news.
Time and time again history shows "highly theoretical and not directly linked with applications" works leading to (sometimes really surprising) technological breakthroughs.
A sign of the times, in which financial and commercial imperatives ultimately dictate what is considered to be of value, so that fundamental research is being shut down by those who are ignorant of how theoretical advances have underpinned so many of the UK's contributions in science.
Incredible that this could happen, As someone has already said in the comments: How can one remove the foundations of Computer Science upon which AI, DS et al. rely?
As already mentioned, ceasing the research in Foundations of Computer Science to focus on a more applied research is very short-sighted. Today's theoretical results lie the basis for tomorrow's applied developments. In particular, the Leicester group has recently coordinated a COST action focused on reversible computing (IC1405), that will undoubtedly have future applications in different fields.
As my colleague Markus Lohrey wrote: "Also successful research in areas like AI, data science, computational modelling and digitalization needs a strong and broad base in mathematics and theoretical computer science." If you cut down the latter, then you will not be successfull in the former. Heiko Vogler, full professor
A University is not a trade school.
Senior Lecturer in Computer Science, King's College London Removing foundations of computing is a short-sighted decision: the ever increasing focus on near-term application and benefit will eventually reduce our ability to innovate by cutting us off the sound foundations without which no practical innovation can be created.
Professor, University of Bologna (I) and INRIA (F) An extremely short-sighted decision: you need Theory and Science to develop good applications. Furthermore, the Foundations of Computer Science (FoCo) group at Leicester is of very high quality
Good grief
How can one remove the foundations of Computer Science upon which AI, DS et al. rely?
Foundations of Computer Science continue to be key to the development of sound informatics approaches
A very shortsighted decision - buildings need firm foundations as do computer science and AI.
It is a shame!
It seems short-sighted to me to cut on the proposed areas. Up until 15 years ago, one could have applied the same argument to the area of AI / machine learning and argue that the results there are not applicable at all. The same way that history has shown this argument should not have been applied to AI / machine learning 15 years ago, I strongly believe that history will also show that this argument should not be applied to the area that you consider too theoretical today.
Professor of Computer Science
Also successful research in areas like AI, data science, computational modelling and digitalization needs a strong and broad base in mathematics and theoretical computer science. Since the work of Newton and Leibniz one should know that technological progress is not possible without purely theoretical research.