The pair work that lasted for two weeks finally came to an end. At the end of the presentation, I would like to share with you our achievements and achievements by reviewing the difficulties we have experienced and the joy of overcoming them.
The pair work project is to supplement and modify the academic map. The principle of project allocation is that you play a number game and select a question in the order of winners. I'm glad I guessed it. First, I chose a project that makes sense, that is, to sort author under the organization in a variety of ways.Source codeThe authors are sorted by citation count of their papers and displayed in a spiral shape. Our goal is not only to sort by citation count, but also to sort by publication count. In addition, we can give users a space to choose which sort can be freely selected. This is the original interface.
First,We have discussed and analyzed this issue and obtained its WBS:
1. Sort: sort the publication
2. UI: The design interface allows users to conveniently select and sort
Next,Let's start exploring the sourceCode, Understand the general framework, and conduct in-depth discussions on the Code related to our issue. Found such a sentence in the source codeString u = string. Format (... & Endidx = {3} & orderby = citationcount ...). The original source code uses the academic search API to directly obtain the top 50 authors with the highest citation count. Can we use the API to obtain the authors of the first 50 publication count? As a result, we checked the API user manual and found that there are only three types of sorting provided above:Citationcount, Year, Rank.The publication sorting is not provided, which means that we have to sort by ourselves. Do we need to obtain all the authors from the API and then sort them?AlgorithmThe time and data size are both limited. At this time, we have made a false setting, that is, in most cases, if the citation of an author's thesis is high, the publication is also relatively high. Therefore, the final solution is to get the top 100 citation authors and sort the top 50 by publication. We think this is reasonable.
Then,The UI design has gone through twists and turns. Let's take a prototype first.
We circled the interface button in the red box. We were very happy when we made it for the first time. As a result, it was too ugly for everyone to reflect it. In fact, I still think it is really not beautiful. Therefore, we have to find a way to improve it. It should be both beautiful and convenient, and the event should be triggered to make better calls. After our suggestions on behalf of Tang Ao, the Department is the final interface. The red box on the right is our menu, which can be automatically displayed with the expanded author.
Finally,The time spent is far longer than we expected. Why? This may be because we do not have enough knowledge about the problem. We thought that sorting is simply to change citationcount to publicationcount. We thought that two buttons and trigger events were added to the interface. However, when it comes to practice, more problems will emerge. This will also reflect the power of cooperation, encourage each other, and urge each other. The following table lists the estimated time and actual time spent on each task.
Cooperation is a process of integration. Some people may feel that they may be more efficient, but sometimes they do. For example, we first looked at the Code together and found that the progress was too slow, and then decided to read it separately. However, the advantage of cooperation is that you are not only thinking about things, but two or more people can come up with a better idea. The so-called three stinks are the best of Zhuge. So although we read the code separately, we finally discuss it and share our experiences. In fact, the most important thing is that I learned a lot from each other. My companion, Qian yiming, is a very good person,ProgramWriting is as fast as thinking. Through the two-week programming, friendship has been improved.
Pair: Zhang Ting & Qian yiming