COM SCI 181
Theory of Computing
Description: Lecture, four hours; discussion, two hours; outside study, six hours. Enforced requisite: course 180. Designed for junior/senior Computer Science majors. Finite state machines, context-free languages, and pushdown automata. Closure properties and pumping lemmas. Turing machines, undecidability. Introduction to computability. Letter grading.
Units: 4.0
Units: 4.0
1 of 1
Most Helpful Review
Summer 2024 - Like the other reviewer, this is a review for CS 180, not 181. I have been spurred to write this as I feel that while the other review communicates frustrations with the class that are very much valid, an overall rating of 2.0 is far lower than deserved for Batista. The homework assignments were difficult, but fair, and both the deadline and grading policies were very lenient (could submit two days late for full credit, and homework was graded on effort). I feel that the lectures may not have prepared students enough for the assignments, but they gave you enough understanding to be able to dig a little deeper on your own and complete the assignments without an unreasonable amount of stress. As for the exams, the other reviewer is definitely right. Given that the course was entirely online and asynchronous (including exams), it was apparent to most students that the exams were designed with a level of difficulty that strongly accounted for the possibility of cheating. But of course, in doing this, you essentially unfairly deflate the grades of almost everyone who wants to be honest and not cheat. The exams seemed like they required a much longer time than was given (4 hours given, and the claim was that they were meant to take 2 hours, yet 4 was not enough), and also seemed to require a level of thinking that I don't think could be expected given the content of the lectures. I took this class very seriously and managed to do okay, but from what I know, cheating was rampant which I felt was unfair. Again, grading on exams was also quite forgiving, so that may have been the part of the intention of making the exams so hard, but the general consensus was that cheating was borderline expected. That being said, Batista is a very kind and reasonable teacher, and some of the grading issues cited in the previous review are more than likely attributable to the TAs rather than Batista. I thoroughly enjoyed the course and looking back was happy to have been challenged on exams more than other courses.
Summer 2024 - Like the other reviewer, this is a review for CS 180, not 181. I have been spurred to write this as I feel that while the other review communicates frustrations with the class that are very much valid, an overall rating of 2.0 is far lower than deserved for Batista. The homework assignments were difficult, but fair, and both the deadline and grading policies were very lenient (could submit two days late for full credit, and homework was graded on effort). I feel that the lectures may not have prepared students enough for the assignments, but they gave you enough understanding to be able to dig a little deeper on your own and complete the assignments without an unreasonable amount of stress. As for the exams, the other reviewer is definitely right. Given that the course was entirely online and asynchronous (including exams), it was apparent to most students that the exams were designed with a level of difficulty that strongly accounted for the possibility of cheating. But of course, in doing this, you essentially unfairly deflate the grades of almost everyone who wants to be honest and not cheat. The exams seemed like they required a much longer time than was given (4 hours given, and the claim was that they were meant to take 2 hours, yet 4 was not enough), and also seemed to require a level of thinking that I don't think could be expected given the content of the lectures. I took this class very seriously and managed to do okay, but from what I know, cheating was rampant which I felt was unfair. Again, grading on exams was also quite forgiving, so that may have been the part of the intention of making the exams so hard, but the general consensus was that cheating was borderline expected. That being said, Batista is a very kind and reasonable teacher, and some of the grading issues cited in the previous review are more than likely attributable to the TAs rather than Batista. I thoroughly enjoyed the course and looking back was happy to have been challenged on exams more than other courses.
Most Helpful Review
Summer 2021 - Professor Burgin cares. One of the few that you can have from UCLA. Might be biased but I major in Math and most Math professors are not this nice and genuine. The materials and the way he teaches the materials are very organized. I was intimidated at first taking this class as I heard there'd be a lot long proofs (there are but most of them are not really that long) and logic traps (not really, he likes problems straightforward), but it turned out one of my favorites. I kinda like doing and solving the puzzles like these. Again. The professor is one of the true good ones. Homeworks, midterms and final are all very reasonable. As long as you care reciprocally about the course, it could be somehow challenging but you'd still be fine.
Summer 2021 - Professor Burgin cares. One of the few that you can have from UCLA. Might be biased but I major in Math and most Math professors are not this nice and genuine. The materials and the way he teaches the materials are very organized. I was intimidated at first taking this class as I heard there'd be a lot long proofs (there are but most of them are not really that long) and logic traps (not really, he likes problems straightforward), but it turned out one of my favorites. I kinda like doing and solving the puzzles like these. Again. The professor is one of the true good ones. Homeworks, midterms and final are all very reasonable. As long as you care reciprocally about the course, it could be somehow challenging but you'd still be fine.
AD
Most Helpful Review
She is the worst professor I've had at UCLA. It is clear that at one time, she was a preeminent mind in her field (around 8th week, you do a section on "Greibach Normal Form"). I would guess that she was at one point a pretty good teacher as well- she at least makes attempts at humor, she seems to understand the material pretty well, and she seemed to at least mildly prefer that we learn something. That being said, she should have retired 10+ years ago. I sat in the third row, and I couldn't hear a word she said. She somehow managed to mumble in a quiet monotone. We started with 40 people in the class, and by the time I stopped going (around 6th week) there were only 12 students still showing up. Her course reader is a collection of fragmented sentences giving vague psuedocode descriptions of algorithms you've never heard of. The savior of this course was Brian Taigku, the TA. If you have to take this class, don't bother going to lecture- just go to your discussion section and you'll be fine. Greibach seems like a nice person, and I have nothing against her personally, but it is clear that she is at UCLA for the sole reason that she is a big name in the field of automata theory. I was surprised her bruinwalk raitings were so high- I suspect that people gave her some leniency because she IS a sweet old woman. Just not a good professor.
She is the worst professor I've had at UCLA. It is clear that at one time, she was a preeminent mind in her field (around 8th week, you do a section on "Greibach Normal Form"). I would guess that she was at one point a pretty good teacher as well- she at least makes attempts at humor, she seems to understand the material pretty well, and she seemed to at least mildly prefer that we learn something. That being said, she should have retired 10+ years ago. I sat in the third row, and I couldn't hear a word she said. She somehow managed to mumble in a quiet monotone. We started with 40 people in the class, and by the time I stopped going (around 6th week) there were only 12 students still showing up. Her course reader is a collection of fragmented sentences giving vague psuedocode descriptions of algorithms you've never heard of. The savior of this course was Brian Taigku, the TA. If you have to take this class, don't bother going to lecture- just go to your discussion section and you'll be fine. Greibach seems like a nice person, and I have nothing against her personally, but it is clear that she is at UCLA for the sole reason that she is a big name in the field of automata theory. I was surprised her bruinwalk raitings were so high- I suspect that people gave her some leniency because she IS a sweet old woman. Just not a good professor.
Most Helpful Review
Fall 2022 - meka is amazing. his lectures are super insightful and genuinely thought provoking. i came in expecting to hate 181 but it ended up being one my favorite ucla cs classes. his exams aren't necessarily easy but i felt that they were fair. biggest tips for success in the class: 1. do all of the practice exams since your exams will have a similar structure 2. do the practice problems on the hw to the best of your ability. even if you can't do them completely on your own, make sure you understand the solutions. a similar problem usually comes up on the exam!
Fall 2022 - meka is amazing. his lectures are super insightful and genuinely thought provoking. i came in expecting to hate 181 but it ended up being one my favorite ucla cs classes. his exams aren't necessarily easy but i felt that they were fair. biggest tips for success in the class: 1. do all of the practice exams since your exams will have a similar structure 2. do the practice problems on the hw to the best of your ability. even if you can't do them completely on your own, make sure you understand the solutions. a similar problem usually comes up on the exam!
Most Helpful Review
He was a good professor. While he didn't do much to spruce up the material, it in itself was fairly interesting and kept me interested. He's not the greatest lecturer, and occasionally strays off on tangents, but they are all fairly relevant and do not detract from the class. Exams are manageable, but our homework grader marked everyone down so liberally most people ended up getting around 20% on most of the homeworks. If you went and talked with Parker though he would listen to your arguments and make changes if he felt you had valid points. Parker is fairly accessible and you can tell that he is genuinely concerned about student learning, though he isn't the greatest lecturer.
He was a good professor. While he didn't do much to spruce up the material, it in itself was fairly interesting and kept me interested. He's not the greatest lecturer, and occasionally strays off on tangents, but they are all fairly relevant and do not detract from the class. Exams are manageable, but our homework grader marked everyone down so liberally most people ended up getting around 20% on most of the homeworks. If you went and talked with Parker though he would listen to your arguments and make changes if he felt you had valid points. Parker is fairly accessible and you can tell that he is genuinely concerned about student learning, though he isn't the greatest lecturer.
AD
Most Helpful Review
Winter 2019 - What an amazing experience CS181 with Professor Sahai was. If you like mathematics, you are in for an absolute treat. Professor Sahai, in his own words, conducts the "advanced mathematical version" of CS181. Anyone who wants to take this class must be prepared to invest a considerable amount of effort. But the rewards are entirely commensurate with the effort. Professor Sahai's lectures involve extensive interactions with students and opportunities abound for extra credit. The homeworks, midterm and exam are all very interesting, and several questions are challenging. Some of them really require meditation and contemplation over the course of several days, and are not at all the type of questions that can be solved in one sitting of a few hours. Several ideas only came to my head while I was in the shower, walking around campus, or eating dinner. These ideas require time to germinate and develop. This is how mathematics is supposed to be done. This was by far the best CS class I ever took at UCLA. And Professor Sahai was the best professor I encountered in CS.
Winter 2019 - What an amazing experience CS181 with Professor Sahai was. If you like mathematics, you are in for an absolute treat. Professor Sahai, in his own words, conducts the "advanced mathematical version" of CS181. Anyone who wants to take this class must be prepared to invest a considerable amount of effort. But the rewards are entirely commensurate with the effort. Professor Sahai's lectures involve extensive interactions with students and opportunities abound for extra credit. The homeworks, midterm and exam are all very interesting, and several questions are challenging. Some of them really require meditation and contemplation over the course of several days, and are not at all the type of questions that can be solved in one sitting of a few hours. Several ideas only came to my head while I was in the shower, walking around campus, or eating dinner. These ideas require time to germinate and develop. This is how mathematics is supposed to be done. This was by far the best CS class I ever took at UCLA. And Professor Sahai was the best professor I encountered in CS.
Most Helpful Review
Spring 2024 - Prof Sherstov is awesome! He's super kind and always willing to help his students understand concepts. A lot of times, the two hour classes feel really long and tiring, but this wasn't the case with 181 with Sherstov. He was great at keeping the class's attention, and the concepts themselves were pretty interesting. Like other reviewers have mentioned, his exams have a built in curve (max 30 points for midterms but score is out of 25 and max 36 points for final but score is out of 30). The final was significantly harder than the midterms imo. Definitely do all the practice midterms and finals he provides, and reading the textbook also helps solidify your understanding. Doing textbook problems can also be helpful. Some homeworks are harder than other, but they're great practice for exams. They're graded on completion/effort, so make sure not to lose these points by forgetting to do them. Final grades were calculated using standard cutoffs: eg: A- : 90-93, A: 93-97, A+ : 97-100 Overall, I totally recommend this class!
Spring 2024 - Prof Sherstov is awesome! He's super kind and always willing to help his students understand concepts. A lot of times, the two hour classes feel really long and tiring, but this wasn't the case with 181 with Sherstov. He was great at keeping the class's attention, and the concepts themselves were pretty interesting. Like other reviewers have mentioned, his exams have a built in curve (max 30 points for midterms but score is out of 25 and max 36 points for final but score is out of 30). The final was significantly harder than the midterms imo. Definitely do all the practice midterms and finals he provides, and reading the textbook also helps solidify your understanding. Doing textbook problems can also be helpful. Some homeworks are harder than other, but they're great practice for exams. They're graded on completion/effort, so make sure not to lose these points by forgetting to do them. Final grades were calculated using standard cutoffs: eg: A- : 90-93, A: 93-97, A+ : 97-100 Overall, I totally recommend this class!
AD
1 of 1
