แปะไว้ขอความเมตตาผู้ที่พบเห็นอ่านและติชมหน่อยค่ะ อาจจะดูโจ๊ก ๆ (ศัพท์เด็กสแตนฝอด) แต่ ณ จุดนี้ฮิคารุแอบเครียดระดับหนึ่งทีเดียวค่ะ เพราะรู้สึกว่าตัวเองไม่ได้มีประวัติด้านการวิจัยดีพอที่มหาวิทยาลัยต่าง ๆ จะอยากรับเป็นนักศึกษาปริญญาเอกขนาดนั้น แต่ฮิคารุอยากเรียนนี่คะ จึงทำอะไรไม่ได้นอกจากลองพยายามสมัครดูเท่านั้น
How has your interest evolved, and what specific turning points can you identify?
I have always had a passion for mathematics since I was little. At sixth grade I was effortlessly qualified as one of Thailand's top ten students in mathematics, at which point I decided to pursue representing my country in the International Mathematics Olympiad (a trend for top mathematics students there at that time). However, after two years of training sessions and competition events I realised that pure mathematics is not my path. After I failed to even qualify to compete in the National Mathematics Olympiad (the result of playing checkers during the training sessions and organizing board game events during every break because I was so uninterested), I became intellectually lost for two months, during which I decided to focus on classical piano and even considered pursuing literature in higher studies.
At the beginning of ninth grade (freshman year for the US system, last year of middle school in Thailand) while I was still intellectually lost, I passed the first round in the National Olympiad in Informatics even though I had zero knowledge for programming. One thing I should note here is that I had a hobby of competing in academic events without expecting any award, since it serves as a good practice for both my knowledge and stress management, (and sometimes as a family vacation :)). It was my strong mathematics background and an unbelievable streak of luck that the exam was multiple choice and the answer of 8 out of 10 questions about programming were the choice C, and that I guessed C for all programming-related questions (Well, there was actually another boy who knew nothing about programming and was qualified in a similar manner as I did). Luckily, my father's best friend was a programmer (the president of NSTDA actually dubbed him the best programmer in Thailand), and he taught me a crash course in programming and C within a month. But seems like Luck still had not messed with me enough, during that time I was simultaneously, without any intention, selected to represent my school to participate in the International Junior Science Olympiad (IJSO) national representative selection process, (Yes, academic Olympiad was the biggest thing for Thai students). I even showed up late for the test because I took my science teacher's joke seriously (I asked him what time did the test start; he said "You'll be fine if you come before 4.30 p.m.", and the test ended at 4.30 p.m.) I was so inattentive that I did not even notice when my name was called in the school's announcement. Anyway, I have to tackle the results from my hobby. However, Luck still thought I did not have enough. Another set of school's committee who did not care about Science Olympiad endorsed me as one of the candidates to represent the school in the World Creativity Festival (WCF) in South Korea, and after several tasks I did qualify as one of the two people who will participate in the Festival. In July, I did not pass through the Informatics Olympiad to no surprise; apparently the crash course was not of CS 106A quality. In October, I juggled the final round of the IJSO process, prepared my presentation for WCF finals, and on top of those, played in table tennis junior varisty - another activity that I loved more than the other two and had been continuously doing for 4 years. Long story short, I did not make it to the IJSO (but performed well enough to be the last standby), and got nothing from WCF despite being lauded to have the best presentation during the closing ceremony due to a careless mistake. (The table tennis went alright, securing a bronze medal for the women's team.) Even though things seemed not too bad, I knew deep down inside that I could have done much better, and I was heavily disappointed.
Juggling between too many things and succeeded in nothing taught me a great lesson, which I think I could not have arrived at this point without passing those times in life. During the IJSO times I realised that chemistry was my strongest subject, and if I were to pursue the Olympiad (Yes, academic Olympiad was still the biggest thing), chemistry would be the best choice. I started quite late, compared to my peers who were in the competition field. Nevertheless, I believed that my love for chemistry could conquer anything. My high school life was devoted to chemistry. As stressed in both academic and social life as a teenager could be, I gave my soul to Chemistry Olympiad. At that time, I was also preparing myself to obtain the King's scholarship, a full scholarship offered to top 9 Thai high school seniors each year to pursue undergraduate study anywhere in any major. When I am stressed from that, I read my chemistry textbook. When I had a fight with my friends, I read my chemistry textbook. When I am tired of playing the piano, I read my chemistry textbook (not the other way around!). I also stayed late at school as often as possible to practise in the lab. Funny enough, there was once I wrote a note to myself that "One day I'll be the world's number one [in Chemistry]." Google my name and look for theoretical part scores in the 2010 International Chemistry Olympiad (if it's still there see
http://foreninger.uio.no/kjemiolympiaden/resultater/Int-finale-resultater2010.pdf)
.
All is well that ends well. I made it to the Olympiad, twice. I got the scholarship. Here comes the real deal: what next? I never really gave a serious thought on what I was going to do next, because I was so overwhelmed by the two big high school goals. I long had a vague idea of doing some sort of engineering. Then what engineering? Why engineering? Just because my dad did so, and his life turned out well? Since a very young age I started out vowing never to do my dad's work, electrical engineering. Not that I despise the subject or my dad, I just wanted to be different. I wanted to be novel. I don't want people to look at me and thought, I chose this career path to follow my dad's footsteps. So should I continue with chemistry, something I loved and apparently was exceptionally good at? What about chemical engineering, which seems to best compromise between the two?
The answer rolls back to my love for mathematics, shunned behind while I was sidetracked by the Asian-style high school academic turmoil. Since there is no mathematical engineering (and I have no interest in finance), electrical engineering is the closest choice. There is also another reason that I chose electrical engineering. During my high school years, I had a private physics tutor because I was weak at it (I missed IJSO because I blanked some questions in the physics exam paper). The tutor is a college professor who oversaw the Physics Olympiad program. To depict how bad I was, on our first day he gave me Olympiad problems for me to solve, and by the last day he ended up assigning me introductory high school mechanics. During the two hours that we meet up on Sunday nights, he would give me a problem, I stared at it for 20 minutes summing up the courage to ask him for a hint, and he spent the rest of the time hinting, guiding, or worst, telling me the answer. For two years, making it about a hundred meetings, there was only once that I was able to solve problems straight by my own, right from the start. It was about electricity - capacitors, resistors, Kirschoff's laws, and the like. He started easy, I sailed through. He moved on to more difficult ones, did not bother me. Reading my answers of the third problem or so, he paused, looked up, and stared into my eyes, "You really have a knack at this, don't you?"
Did I not say that I loved chemistry so much, that I dedicated my soul to it for my entire high school life? To be more accurate, I loved solving chemistry problems as presented in the Chemistry Olympiad exams. I told myself that I love chemistry, so that studying chemistry would serve as an outlet from my overly stressed missions (and also a revenge to those who looked down on me after I failed IJSO). Moreoever, the practical part is my weakness (I could tell you another long story about how the practical exams always degraded my performance by 50%; how I was short one question from achieving perfect score in the Chemistry Olympiad i.e. being the world's number one eternally, due to a minute mistake during the practical exam), and being a chemist is actually about performing experiments in the laboratory, not solving puzzles on paper to try to gain as many points as possible. I also received a warning from a respected elder, a chemistry major herself, that in order to lead a healthy enough life as a chemist I need to be scrupulously careful when handling chemical substances. Even though she encouraged me in pursuing the Olympiad, she advised against pursuing the career. "The Olympiad takes only 3 years, but the career takes your life," she said. "No matter how well they protect themselves, most chemists still end up with cancer. It is just a matter of time." At that time, I had been to several funerals of my parents' friends - most of them were chemists or chemical engineers. Eventually, I decided that I did not love chemistry enough to sacrifice the well-being of my health.
Walking into Stanford as a freshman I had a tentative plan of studying electrical engineering, and taking several introductory courses confirmed my decision to declare the major. At that time, I was still averse to research for I had a bad first impression with scientific research in middle school. Also, scientific research all looks too technical and far-fetched for me, not until one day during the spring of my first year. I was sitting in a probabilistic analysis class (EE 178), and Professor Balaji Prabhakar talked about an experiment that his group was launching called Capri, an incentive program aimed at reducing traffic congestion on campus. Growing up in a country where congestion is a chronic disease (I woke up at 5.30 a.m. everyday through the 6 years of my secondary school to beat the traffic), I immediately envision how great an impact this research can induce. Moreover, I had never seen an electrical engineering research that is understandable even for a college freshman who had only taken introductory circuits (the paper did not even discuss circuits). In the last lecture, I was more than fortunate when I walked up to Professor Prabhakar at the end of class to show my appreciation for the course. "Are you Pinnaree?" he asked. I was appalled that he knew my name, but the next question stunned me. "Are you interested in joining our research group?"
So from the beginning of my sophomore year I got a chance to attend his group's lab meetings, learning all the mechanisms behind Capri, as well as other projects run by the Stanford Center for Societal Networks. In the meantime I also explored other fields in electrical engineering through classes. My favourites were undoubtedly all those related to data and signal processing such as statistical signal processing, digital communication, and machine learning. At that time my interests were yet not clear, but the ideas hover around analyzing data using signal processing techniques and use those analyses to solve, or at least improve the solution for, practical problems in societal networks. In my sophomore summer, I conducted a research project with Professor Prabhakar, analyzing carbon footprint reduction for Capri. The project started out as exploring a scheme to reduce carbon footprint generated by academic conferences where people travel by air all over the country (or the world), mainly developing an online academic conference platform. However, since data collection did not work out practically due to privacy policy in revealing participants' original locations and the online platform had been extensively investigated by the industry, the project was dropped. Even though that made my research seemed not as professional as my peers' (Professor Balaji even apologized to me), in my opnion it was the most invaluable experience - not all research works out. I decided to mine the Capri data (with high confidence in beating the confidentiality, after all, our group is the person who filled up the database) and studied the carbon footprint generated by the program's members. Not only I discover that Capri reduces commuters' carbon footprint by 37%, but also how the status of each user (Capri uses a status system similar to frequent flyer programs) affects the pattern of his/her carbon footprint behaviour. I have felt that my research had no significance for the longest time until I read a news article where the president and CEO of the
Partnership for New York City claimed that Capri showed "no net reduction in carbon footprint." (
http://www.wnyc.org/story/285723-on-congestion-charging-carrot-or-stick-mixed-responses/). "THAT IS NOT TRUE!!!!!" I exclaimed in my mind. "I STUDIED THAT MY ENTIRE SUMMER!" Throughout my junior year I continued doing research with the group, but was involved in smaller tasks including Capri Fuel (a Capri add-on that gives rewards when users fill up gas) and smartphone positioning sensors, systems, and algorithms.
Before I could describe the whole picture of my interest, let me mention to you another long-time, deep passion of mine that never came into play in my academic life until very recently. I do not know if it was because my parents regularly consult a psychologist since I was six so I got to talk to him and did psychological tests pretty often, or because my mother just loves to analyse people's behaviour, I have always viewed the world through psychological lenses, subconsciously. The passion remained hidden until I took PSYCH 1 (Introduction to Psychology) in my first quarter of college, in which I discovered that what I had been pondering in my mind all the time for the almost two decades of my life is actually a field of study called "psychology". Perhaps that triggered my impression with Capri, which involves meddling with people's behaviors and how to influence them, in the first place. Designing nudge engines and observing how they impact people's behavior using mathematics and engineering combine as a perfect match. I seriously considered pursuing psychology in my graduate studies, but electrical engineering still won in the end (it did take me several months to resolve on that). Electrical engineering with a tint of psychology is even a better option.
Recently, I had a chance to talk to Professor Michael Hsieh from UC Berkeley Extension when I was volunteering for the 2014 HotChips Symposium. We were discussing my research interest, and we share an enthusiasm in what Professor Hsieh dubbed "the people grid." Electrical engineers have studied power grid, computer grid (the Internet), social grid (social networks), things grid (internet of things), but not yet the people grid, which goes deeper in tangibility than the social network's online interactions. The people grid will involve collecting and analyzing data on people's characters, behaviors, and connections, and since human psychology is very complex this field has been not feasible until the arrival of big data. It could help in matching people for research, business, and even romantic interests. It could enable governments to influence people's behaviors more easily in order to efficiently manage the society. Societal networks is probably a subset of the people grid, which I would personally call "urban system grid". That is the direction of study that I am currently most interested in pioneering.
ขอบพระคุณจากใจจริงอย่างยิ่งค่ะ
ฮิคารุ
