Difference between revisions of "Reading Seminar 2018-19"
|Line 115:||Line 115:|
Revision as of 18:02, 28 January 2019
My (Daniel's) experience has been that reading seminars have diminishing returns: they run out of steam after about 8 lectures on a certain book, as everyone starts falling behind, etc. I was thinking aim broader (rather than deeper), covering 3 books, but with fewer lectures. My idea is to partly cover: Beauville's "Complex Algebraic Surfaces"; Atiyah's "K-theory" (1989 edition); and Harris and Morrison's "Moduli of Curves". We would do about 6-8 lectures on each. This allows us to reboot every two months, which I hope will be mentally refreshing and will allow people who have lost the thread of the book to rejoin. Anyways, it's an experiment!
- Here is lecture notes from Ravi Vakil on Complex Algebraic Surfaces "http://math.stanford.edu/~vakil/02-245/index.html"
- Each book will have a co-organizer: Wanlin Li for Beauville's book; Michael Brown for Atiyah's book; and Rachel Davis for Harris and Mumford's book. Thanks!
- I left some "Makeup" dates in the schedule with the idea that we would most likely take a week off on those dates. But if we need to miss another date (because of a conflict with a special colloquium or some other event), then we can use those as makeup slots.
We are experimenting with lots of new formats in this year's seminar. If you aren't happy with how the reading seminar is going, please let one of the organizers (Daniel, Wanlin, Michael, or Rachel) know and we will do our best to get things back on a helpful track.
Time and Location
Talks will be on Fridays from 11:45-12:35 in B325. This semester, Daniel is planning to keep a VERY HARD watch on the clock.
|September 7||Wanlin Li||Beauville I|
|September 14||Rachel Davis||Beauville II|
|September 21||Brandon Boggess||Beauville II and III|
|September 28||Mao Li||Beauville III|
|October 5||Wendy Cheng||Beauville IV|
|October 12||Soumya Sankar||Beauville V|
|October 19||David Wagner||Beauville V and VI|
|October 26||Dan Corey||Beauville VII and VIII|
|November 2||No Meeting||Break|
|November 9||Michael Brown||Atiyah 1 (Overview of goals of the seminar, Section 2.1)|
|November 16||Asvin Gothandaraman||Atiyah 2 (Section 2.2)|
|November 23||NO MEETING||Thanksgiving|
|November 30||Daniel Erman||Atiyah 3 (Section 2.5)|
|SEMESETER BREAK||No meetings|
|January 25||Daniel Erman||Atiyah 3 (Section 2.5: Examples)|
|February 1||Rachel Davis||Atiyah 4 (Section 2.3: Bott periodicity)|
|February 8||Michael Brown||Atiyah 5 (Thom isomorphism)|
|February 15||Mao Li||Algebraic K theory, Localization theorem and flag variety.|
|February 22||No Meeting|
|March 1||Juliette Bruce||Moduli 1|
|March 8||Niudun Wang||Moduli 2|
|March 15||Rachel Davis||Moduli 3|
|March 22||NO MEETING||Spring recess|
|March 29||Michael Brown||Moduli 4|
|April 5||??||Moduli 5|
|April 12||??||Moduli 6|
|April 19||??||Moduli 7|
How to plan your talk
One key to giving good talks in a reading seminar is to know how to refocus the material that you read. Instead of going through the chapter lemma by lemma, you should ask: What is the main idea in this section? It could be a theorem, a definition, or even an example. But after reading the section, decide what the most important idea is and be sure to highlight early on.
You will probably need to skip the proofs--and even the statements--of many of the lemmas and other results in the chapter. This is a good thing! The reason someone attends a talk, as opposed to just reading the material on their own, is because they want to see the material from the perspective of someone who has thought it about carefully.
Also, make sure to give clear examples.
Feedback on talks
One of the goals for this semester is to help the speakers learn to give better talks. Here is our plan:
- Discuss a plan for the talk. Here the speaker can outline what they see as the main ideas, and the partner can share any wisdom gleaned from their experience the previous week.
- Ask the speaker if there are any particular things that the speaker would like feedback on (e.g. pacing, boardwork, clarity of voice, etc.).
The partner would also take notes during the feedback session, to give the speaker a record of the conversation.
This is very much an experiment, and while it might be intimidating at first, I actually think it could really help everyone (the speakers and the audience members too).