MATH 131A
Analysis
Description: Lecture, three hours; discussion, one hour. Requisites: courses 32B, 33B. Recommended: course 115A. Rigorous introduction to foundations of real analysis; real numbers, point set topology in Euclidean space, functions, continuity. P/NP or letter grading.
Units: 4.0
Units: 4.0
12 of 12
Most Helpful Review
Spring 2023 - I really loved 131A with Professor Wu! He is an amazing professor, during lecture he used many colored chalks and helped build intuition for the harder concepts. He also always provided midterm/final reviews and during office hours he was very approachable and helpful. Although the class is one of the hardest math courses, this class really helped me build strong foundations in proof writing and core concepts I still use. It was overall a very rewarding class, so if you have the option to take 131A with Wu, I highly recommend. You will learn a lot and are in good hands :)
Spring 2023 - I really loved 131A with Professor Wu! He is an amazing professor, during lecture he used many colored chalks and helped build intuition for the harder concepts. He also always provided midterm/final reviews and during office hours he was very approachable and helpful. Although the class is one of the hardest math courses, this class really helped me build strong foundations in proof writing and core concepts I still use. It was overall a very rewarding class, so if you have the option to take 131A with Wu, I highly recommend. You will learn a lot and are in good hands :)
AD
Most Helpful Review
Spring 2024 - Professor Xu is a good professor and has definitely improved on issues that students have pointed out in the past. Homework: Homework is assigned every week with around six questions. You choose three to complete and submit for grading, while the others can be used for practice before exams. This system makes it easier to get a good grade on homework since you can cherry-pick the problems you feel most confident about. Exams: The average for our final was around 65%, which might seem low, but the exams were fair. The questions were very similar to the homework and practice problems provided, so studying those is excellent preparation. The tests were graded fairly, with minimal points deducted for small errors and partial credit given for demonstrating some line of reasoning or decent attempt, even if the proof wasn’t entirely correct. Grade Distribution: Some past complaints mention harsh grade distributions, but I found the grading this quarter (Spring 2024) to be fair and typical for the math department. About 25% of the class received some form of an A, most other students received some form of a B, and the lowest percentiles received grades below that. Professor Xu curved the class by looking at the grade distributions and then assigning grade brackets to fit the distribution (e.g., 85+ was an A-, 70+ was a B-, etc.). Lectures: His lectures are clear, and he is good about answering questions during class. While some concepts can be difficult to understand, as long as you follow along and take notes, you should be able to grasp the general idea and review confusing details later (or ask him during office hours). The lectures are not recorded, which is standard for upper-division math classes. However, he posts his notes from previous quarters, which can be a good guide if you miss a class or want to get ahead. There are some deviations between past notes and the current quarter’s teachings, but they are still useful. Office Hours: One of Professor Xu's best strengths is his office hours. He hosts them twice a week and is very helpful in answering all sorts of questions, including homework. TL;DR: Professor Xu is a good professor with easy homework, tough but fair exams, an average grading scheme, clear lectures, and good office hours.
Spring 2024 - Professor Xu is a good professor and has definitely improved on issues that students have pointed out in the past. Homework: Homework is assigned every week with around six questions. You choose three to complete and submit for grading, while the others can be used for practice before exams. This system makes it easier to get a good grade on homework since you can cherry-pick the problems you feel most confident about. Exams: The average for our final was around 65%, which might seem low, but the exams were fair. The questions were very similar to the homework and practice problems provided, so studying those is excellent preparation. The tests were graded fairly, with minimal points deducted for small errors and partial credit given for demonstrating some line of reasoning or decent attempt, even if the proof wasn’t entirely correct. Grade Distribution: Some past complaints mention harsh grade distributions, but I found the grading this quarter (Spring 2024) to be fair and typical for the math department. About 25% of the class received some form of an A, most other students received some form of a B, and the lowest percentiles received grades below that. Professor Xu curved the class by looking at the grade distributions and then assigning grade brackets to fit the distribution (e.g., 85+ was an A-, 70+ was a B-, etc.). Lectures: His lectures are clear, and he is good about answering questions during class. While some concepts can be difficult to understand, as long as you follow along and take notes, you should be able to grasp the general idea and review confusing details later (or ask him during office hours). The lectures are not recorded, which is standard for upper-division math classes. However, he posts his notes from previous quarters, which can be a good guide if you miss a class or want to get ahead. There are some deviations between past notes and the current quarter’s teachings, but they are still useful. Office Hours: One of Professor Xu's best strengths is his office hours. He hosts them twice a week and is very helpful in answering all sorts of questions, including homework. TL;DR: Professor Xu is a good professor with easy homework, tough but fair exams, an average grading scheme, clear lectures, and good office hours.
Most Helpful Review
Winter 2024 - Great professor and someone you should take for a class like this. While homeworks could be a bit tricky, he offers to solve them in office hours. Notes do go by the book, but he usually provides alternative proofs to various theorems which helps with understanding. Exams were fair and he never tried to trick you. They were based off of in class examples and homework problems. I wish he were teaching 131B because he did a great teaching this course.
Winter 2024 - Great professor and someone you should take for a class like this. While homeworks could be a bit tricky, he offers to solve them in office hours. Notes do go by the book, but he usually provides alternative proofs to various theorems which helps with understanding. Exams were fair and he never tried to trick you. They were based off of in class examples and homework problems. I wish he were teaching 131B because he did a great teaching this course.
Most Helpful Review
Spring 2017 - Took him for 131A. Avoid this professor at all costs. The midterms and final are doable. However, the material itself is already very difficult and this professor did a horrendous job of teaching it. All of the lectures were him mumbling incoherently, and it is extremely hard to understand him through his accent, making it basically impossible to learn from lecture. In addition, after writing something down on the board, he will often erase it immediately rather than erasing something he wrote earlier. Out of the ~40 people who were in this class from the beginning, only 9 people, including myself, were showing up consistently during the last few weeks. That's not a typo. Several of them dropped out, as evidenced by the grading distribution of the final showing a paltry student count of 22. The averages for the midterms were around 50-55%, and presumably the only reason the average for the final was higher was because of the lower student count. The only reason why I managed to pull a reasonable grade in this class was because of the TA's much more helpful discussions, though unfortunately one discussion a week doesn't make up for 3 whole days of inefficient lecturing. If you're a self-learner, you may do well in this class. But otherwise, choose a more well-known, competent lecturer instead of this guy. He is the absolute worst lecturer I have had at UCLA and doesn't deserve to be teaching at all.
Spring 2017 - Took him for 131A. Avoid this professor at all costs. The midterms and final are doable. However, the material itself is already very difficult and this professor did a horrendous job of teaching it. All of the lectures were him mumbling incoherently, and it is extremely hard to understand him through his accent, making it basically impossible to learn from lecture. In addition, after writing something down on the board, he will often erase it immediately rather than erasing something he wrote earlier. Out of the ~40 people who were in this class from the beginning, only 9 people, including myself, were showing up consistently during the last few weeks. That's not a typo. Several of them dropped out, as evidenced by the grading distribution of the final showing a paltry student count of 22. The averages for the midterms were around 50-55%, and presumably the only reason the average for the final was higher was because of the lower student count. The only reason why I managed to pull a reasonable grade in this class was because of the TA's much more helpful discussions, though unfortunately one discussion a week doesn't make up for 3 whole days of inefficient lecturing. If you're a self-learner, you may do well in this class. But otherwise, choose a more well-known, competent lecturer instead of this guy. He is the absolute worst lecturer I have had at UCLA and doesn't deserve to be teaching at all.
AD
12 of 12
