博文
The Weinberg Test
||||
Nowadays, in many research areas, even including most practical disciplines, such as electrical and electronic engineering, communication, signal processing, chemical engineering, mechanical engineering, computer science, etc., the gap between theory and practice is only becoming wider and wider. Probably this is one of the reasons why Gerald Weinberg introduces this Weinberg Test, which would filter out most of the research outputs in the practical disciplines mentioned above, not to mention those of the not-so-practical research areas. After reading this short description, we should ask ourselves: can our research pass the Weinberg Test?
The Weinberg Test by Gerald M. Weinberg:
While attending a computer conference in Davos, I found myself listening to a panel of three professors who debated the subject of computer science education. After describing their three different approaches to curricula, the panelists solicited questions from the floor. Someone asked, "How do you measure the effectiveness of your curricula?"
Instead of a reply, there was much clearing of throats, hemming, mumbling, and hawing. The audience stirred in their seats and hooted remarks concerning the usefulness of colleges and the mental capacity of the professors. Finally, one of the panelists challenged the audience to propose their own measurements. When nobody else seemed willing to take the risk, I accepted the challenge."
Imagine," I said, "that this conference is finished and you have taken the train to Zurich to fly home. You have boarded your flight and the doors have been locked when you hear the following announcement blare over the loudspeaker in an artificial voice:
Fellow passengers: Today, you are participating in a historic event, the first fully automated commercial flight. From this moment on, until you arrive at the gate at your destination, this plane is under the complete control of a microcomputer. There is no human pilot or co-pilot, but you need not be concerned for your safety. The program that controls the plane was accepted as a thesis project for a doctorate in computer science at X University. Bon voyage! "
The true test of your curriculum," I continued, "is how you feel at that moment."
Apparently, the professors on the panel didn't think my test was helpful, but the audience broke into uncontrollable giggles. The moderator tried to restore order, but the audience seemed to have lost interest in what the panelists had to say, once the panel had labeled my test as ridiculous. I, myself, was feeling rather downhearted, for I had intended the test as a serious standard, the most serious standard I could imagine.
As the room cleared, I was approached by a short, white-haired man, sporting a goatee and wearing a three-piece gray suit. He addressed me in English with a German accent: "Professor Weinberg, I liked your test. Unlike the panel members, I believe it to be a serious test, and I wanted to tell you that it correctly measures my own curriculum."
I was delighted to have someone take me seriously, so I asked, "And how would you feel when you heard the announcement?"
His reply surprised me. "Oh, I wouldn't be worried at all. I would he completely confident of my safety."
"Really? Is your program that good?"
"Not at all," he answered, a twinkle in his eye. "But if one of our students wrote the system, it wouldn't even start the engines!"
Over the years, whenever anyone asks me how to measure risk, I've recalled the goateed professor. Although there are many tests one might apply, The Weinberg Test seems to occupy a fundamental place in the hierarchy of all possible tests. In brief, The Weinberg Test asks,Would you place your own life in the hands of this system?
Not all systems need such a severe test, so I have constructed weaker versions of The Weinberg Test, such as,
Would you risk your right arm?
Would you risk your left hand?
Would you risk your life's savings?
Would you risk a month's salary?
Would you risk 10 dollar of your own money?
I've used the 10 dollar test several hundred times with computer programmers who assert that their program is now bug-free. Ninety-five times out of a hundred, the programmer backs down and refuses to wager 10 dollar that I can't find a bug in a reasonable amount of time. The other five times out of a hundred, I win 10 dollar.
It's not hard to be confident with other people's money. The essential element of The Weinberg Test is the requirement that the claimant risk something personal, rather than simply blabber some empty abstractions.
As consultants, we're trying to apply Ford's Fundamental Feedback Formula to ourselves, at least conceptually. In street language, The Weinberg Test is called "putting your money where your mouth is."
When we consultants propose changes, the first thing we should do is decide what level of Weinberg Test we're designing for, then put our own feelings on the line. If human lives are at stake, then our own feeling of safety is the minimum goal. If money is at stake, then we have to personalize that money on a scale we'd feel if it were our own money.
In the engineering disciplines, it took many deaths to provide the motivation for improving the state of the art. Ships sank, bridges collapsed, buildings burnt, airplanes crashed, steam engines exploded. How many human lives will we have to sacrifice before consultants learn how to do it right the first time?
I hope we won't have to sacrifice any. But what about other sacrifices—of time, of money, of human comfort? When life or death is not directly involved, we haven't done so well at personalizing the outcome. Perhaps The Weinberg Test could save more than lives. Perhaps it could save our jobs, our reputations, and even our self-respect.
https://m.sciencenet.cn/blog-286797-599668.html
上一篇：Selected English readings for recitation: Lewis Carroll
下一篇：Bringing energy into Engineering Cybernetics (control)
扫一扫，分享此博文
全部作者的精选博文
全部作者的其他最新博文
全部精选博文导读
相关博文
- • Minerals线下恳谈会：履践致远、与时偕行——对话中国科学院广州地球化学研究所期刊合作学者
- • 聚英才 建高地 | 北京理工大学“特立青年学者”全球招聘开启
- • 700年后日本或濒临灭绝？日本学者推算预测：届时或仅剩1名15岁以下孩子
- • [转载]【同位素视角】非英语母语学者如何区分’e.g.’, ‘i.e.’, ‘namely’与‘such as’等混淆难题
- • 美国佐治亚大学等机构学者：刈割策略对Bulldog 805紫花苜蓿+Tifton 85狗牙根混播草地产量及品质的影响
- • 美国堪萨斯州立大学、密苏里大学等机构学者研究成果：土壤水分管理策略和品种多样性对紫花苜蓿产量、营养品质和农场盈利能力的影