AISE502/moodle/week_14.html

54 lines
5.8 KiB
HTML
Raw Blame History

This file contains ambiguous Unicode characters

This file contains Unicode characters that might be confused with other characters. If you think that this is intentional, you can safely ignore this warning. Use the Escape button to reveal them.

<!-- ==========================================================================
AISE502 · Moodle course page · Week 14
Section title (Edit section → Section name): Week 14: Synthesis, Presentations, and Architecture Defence
Three blocks follow, matching the FHGR section template. Paste each block into the
corresponding 'Text and media area' (editor → source code view), or all three into one.
The slide set of lecture 14 is added by the lecturer as a file resource below block 2.
Generated by src/build_moodle.py from src/content/week_14.json – edit the JSON, not this file.
========================================================================== -->
<!-- BLOCK 1 · Learning objectives -->
<h4>🎯 Learning objectives</h4>
<ul>
<li>I can read the script backwards as one argument, from assumptions A1–A6 to the ADR with a measurement contract.</li>
<li>I can distinguish the two temptations, denial and exceptionalism, from the position the script defends: absorption.</li>
<li>I can explain Maxim 8: why AI, on either axis, changes no step from scenarios to ADR.</li>
<li>I can explain why Axis A and Axis B reach the same conclusion: one discipline at two binding sites.</li>
<li>I know the examination facts: 50 %, 60 minutes, open book (script and notes on paper), closed internet.</li>
<li>I can defend my team's architectural trade-offs on A2's artefacts – ADR, C4 diagram, measurement contract.</li>
</ul>
<!-- BLOCK 2 · Theory -->
<h4>🧑‍🏫 Theory</h4>
<p><strong>Lecture 14: Synthesis, Presentations, and Architecture Defence</strong> · 1 lesson synthesis + 3 lessons presentations and defence<br>
One lesson of synthesis and exam hints with no new material, then three lessons of final presentations, architecture defence and peer reviews (Deliverable A3, milestone M6).</p>
<ul>
<li>Two temptations – denial, falsified by adoption data alone (90 % of practitioners by 2025), and exceptionalism, rejected on the evidence – bracket the position defended since Part I: absorption.</li>
<li>Read backwards, the script is one argument: Part I sets A1–A4 and the twelve dimensions, Parts II–III build capability and requirements profiles, Part IV matches them into an ADR (assumption A5).</li>
<li>Part V's stress test held (assumption A6). Maxim 8: the theory absorbs AI – tenth class, twelfth dimension, shifted cells, one emergent composition pattern – same assumptions, same procedure, same contract.</li>
<li>Axis A (cheap generation, verification bottleneck) and Axis B (cheap model output, validation bottleneck) are one discipline at two binding sites: containing cheap, fallible generation behind expensive, explicit verification.</li>
<li>The written examination: 50 % of the grade, end of semester, 60 minutes, open book (script and own notes on paper), closed internet; focus architecture reasoning – profiles, matching, trade-offs.</li>
<li>The open-book map: Maxim 8's sentence and four tables – twelve dimensions, consolidated capability table, requirements table, 7 × 10 fit matrix – plus the spine A1–A6 and the Maxims.</li>
</ul>
<p>📎 <strong>Materials:</strong> Slide set of Lecture 14 <em>(added below by the lecturer)</em> · Script: No new script sections – the reading for the examination is the whole script, Parts I–V.</p>
<!-- BLOCK 3 · Self-study and assignments -->
<h4>🧑‍💻 Self-study and assignments</h4>
<p><strong>📖 Reading before the lecture:</strong> No new script sections – the reading for the examination is the whole script, Parts I–V.</p>
<p><strong>Also before the lecture:</strong></p>
<ul>
<li>Prepare the final presentation with architecture defence (Deliverable A3): present the system and defend your architectural trade-offs.</li>
<li>Prepare the reflection on where AI helped and where it hurt – in building (A) and in the system (B).</li>
<li>Bring your questions on the script and the examination for the Q&amp;A in the synthesis lesson.</li>
</ul>
<p><strong>🧩 Exercise session:</strong> Three lessons of final presentations, architecture defence and peer reviews (Deliverable A3, milestone M6): each team presents its system, defends its trade-offs and reflects on where AI helped and hurt; slot length per team, presentation order and the peer-review form are to be announced.</p>
<p><strong>🛠️ Project work this week</strong> · Milestone M6 – Presentation and Architecture Defence (week 14)</p>
<ul>
<li>Present the system the mandatory part requires – architecture derived from the ontology with ADRs and a C4-style diagram, fully tested deterministic services, an orchestrated advisor with 2–3 sub-agents, ontology guard and resilience, evaluation harness and observability – as a reproducible demo on a data snapshot, keeping the deterministic core free of LLM calls.</li>
<li>Defend your architectural trade-offs on A2's artefacts – the ADR, the C4 diagram, the measurement contract; the assessment emphasises architecture and trade-offs, robustness, quality, AI integration and operation.</li>
<li>Reflect on where AI helped and where it hurt – in building (Axis A: generation cheap, verification the bottleneck) and in the system (Axis B: model output cheap, validation the bottleneck) – and test whether one discipline at two binding sites held in your project.</li>
<li>Peer-review the other teams' presentations and defences – form, criteria and reviewer assignment to be announced; listen for which High weight of R(a) carried their decision and which veto they had to mitigate.</li>
<li>Be prepared to show one measurement-contract violation being caught by CI (Lecture 11).</li>
</ul>
<div style="border-left:4px solid #1b6ec2; background:#eef5fc; padding:8px 12px; margin:10px 0;">📌 <strong>Due this week:</strong> Deliverable A3 (week 14): final presentation with architecture defence, peer reviews</div>