Thesis Design

Deliverables

Thesis - dr.physics.wtf ¹ + pdf
Artefact - pata.physics.wtf
Map - pamatamap.com ²

1 Web version: post submission, pre viva
2 Map: post viva

Visualisation created using gource and ffmpeg

Visualisation

"Stacked-bar-code" chart

width proportional to number of pages
top row shows individual chapters
top row colours taken from map
bottom row shows the different parts
bottom row colours created using hex addition

### [Methodology](https://dr.physics.wtf/html/methodology.html)

This is the chapter I struggled most with!

- computer science (e.g. data, proof, model, build)
- arts & humanities (e.g. document, reflect, curate, narrative)
- transdisciplinarity - Nicolescu:  
  **"unity in diversity and diversity from unity"**
- Hugill & Yang methodology (see [page 62](https://dr.physics.wtf/files/FR-thesis-small.pdf#page=62))
- Edmonds & Candy model (see [Fig. 3.3](https://dr.physics.wtf/html/methodology.html#fig:3.3))

*review identify analyse propose design experiment*

Notes:

I hadn't made decisions about this in my early stages and just did what I did. So in retrospect I had to describe what methodology I used, without really having used one at all.

- digital humanities best fit

### Corrections

1. [chapter summaries](https://dr.physics.wtf/files/FR-thesis-small.pdf#page=38)
2. [diagram of thesis](https://dr.physics.wtf/files/FR-thesis-small.pdf#page=39)
3. [sound and music](https://dr.physics.wtf/files/FR-thesis-small.pdf#page=275)
4. move [references](https://dr.physics.wtf/files/FR-thesis-small.pdf#page=289) before [appendices](https://dr.physics.wtf/files/FR-thesis-small.pdf#page=317)
5. include [readme](https://dr.physics.wtf/files/FR-thesis-small.pdf#page=349) in thesis
6. typos

Notes:

1. At the end of each chapter: a short summary of where it fits into the whole PhD structure. This to be related to -
2. A diagram of the total PhD structure, showing how the chapters feed the overall PhD: the design, construction and evaluation of the website tools. This pulls everything together to increase the impact of the PhD and its original output. The candidate can decide how best to present this and whether in the Introduction or the Conclusion to the thesis.
3. Sound and music are hardly referred to. In the ‘to be developed in future’ section a paragraph stating this as a given for this thesis but pointing out the potential for its development (possible reference: Hugill).
4. The References should immediately follow the main text before appendices and other such material.
5. The ‘ReadMe’ from the accompanying disc (or other media storage – disc may not be needed in final Library copy – to be checked with the GSO and Library) to be available in the main thesis as an appendix ‘How to run the website software’ – check that it works exactly from the instructions given there.
6. The internal examiner’s copy of the PhD (returned to the candidate at the conclusion of the viva) has marked up some typos for correction. [The examiners commended the candidate for the small number found!]