Google Colab Vs Jupyter Notebook: Which Is Better For Data Science Beginners?
Google Colaboratory and Jupyter Notebook are powerful tools for collaboration when it comes to data science.
They are user-friendly, with graphical platforms that allow you to create and run code without needing expert programming skills or installing software libraries on your computer.
The differences in environment between Google Colab and Jupyter Notebook are also what make them unique from one another. While both can be used to help host research, it's essential to understand the various specifications of each tool before choosing which is better for your purposes. Much of that decision will likely come from the format and content you'll be working with.
In this article, I will tell you which is better for data science by comparing some of its key features and functionality. So let's get started!
What is Google Colab?
Google Colab is totally free and open source; you can use it without any charges on your cloud account. It is best used for smaller computational tasks for which you won't need the full power of your local machine. Using the Google Cloud Platform, we can access a wide array of Google-related services which we can use to solve problems through computing.
Features:
Google Colab is a collaborative software development platform that offers an easy way to develop applications using a variety of coding languages, including python. Google Colab helps users collaborate on code and content management via the Google Cloud Platform (GCP).
It has a built-in debugger, which allows you to see what code is running in the background without slowing down your program. This can be useful if you've written some code and it's not working correctly or if you need to debug something before actually running the program in production mode.
It has its own version control system called GitLab CEHQ, which lets you store all of your work on GitHub and keep track of changes made over time, as well as changes made by other users. You can even use this tool for collaboration with others who may not be familiar with GitHub CEHQ itself!
Visit the data science course in Chennai to learn more about how to use Google Colab and practice your codes here!
What is a Jupyter Notebook?
Jupyter notebook is an interactive computing platform for the web that is free, open-source, and was developed as a spinoff of IPython. Jupyter Notebook is a web application that enables users to create and share computation documents with one another.
Features:
1. Jupyter Notebooks are generally written in python, which makes them easy to read and edit by non-techies.
2. They can also be run on an individual's laptop or mobile device, making them ideal for data scientists working on various machines.
3. A Quick Comparison – Google Colab or Jupyter Notebook
4. If you're not sure about which tool to choose for your projects, here is a detailed comparison between Google Colab vs Jupyter Notebook:
5. Google Colab and Jupyter Notebook are similar tools that offer ways to use the Python programming language. However, in Colab, you can not install any module; you should have python installed on your Google machine.
6. Jupyter is a web-based interface that allows editing, sharing, and executing documents with code cells.
7. Colab and Jupyter notebooks provide a nice user interface to write code, plot things or insert interactive plots, share online and collaborate with others.
8. The Jupyter notebook was implemented in JavaScript, and the code is available on GitHub.
9. A Colab notebook can only run for 12 hours at a time. Idle sessions end far earlier than that.
10. Colab does not save any information about the environment (e.g. installed packages, files, etc.) Every new session necessitates a fresh set-up of the environment.
11. Colab has built-in version control and commenting features. While with Jupyter Notebooks, we must use GitHub/Bitbucket and ReviewNB to accomplish the same.
12. Even with premium Colab Pro/Pro+ subscriptions, there is no resource guarantee.
Reasons why Jupyter is Better – (My Opinion)
What I like most about Colab is its simplicity and ease of use. The best part is, you don't even have to install or configure anything. Here, you are spending most of your time on documentation, so if the tool itself adds complexities, it defeats the purpose. On the other hand, Jupyter Notebook comes with exciting features like LaTeX rendering and Markdown editing support.
First, the Jupyter Notebook has an easier learning curve. It allows you to write code directly in the browser and then integrates it with other tools and services like MATLAB or Python. This makes it easy to start using a new language or tool without learning all the ins and outs of that language.
Jupyter Notebook allows users to share their work with others more easily than Google Colab does. If you're working on a project with someone else, you can click "Share" and send them your notebook where they can see what you've done so far. They can also comment if they want or edit themselves if they're so inclined!
Google Colab has many additional features that make it more powerful than the Jupyter notebook (like live coding). But, they are also more challenging to learn because they require additional software (like MATLAB).
Final Words!
Colab is a great tool to use if you are conducting data science with python and big data. Jupyter, on the other hand, can be used for data science and to build documents. Both have their pros and cons. It all boils down to your specific needs right now, so there isn't a hard-and-fast rule to determine which one should be used over the other. If you're a data science aspirant, check out the data science and machine learning course in Chennai , learn the in-demand skills, and leverage them in your projects with the help of Google colab or jupyter. It all depends on your comfort!
About the Creator
Data science blogger
I am mallikarjun , a data science enthusiast and passionate blogger who loves to write about data science and latest technologies. I always believe in smart learning processes that help people understand concepts better,
Keep reading
More stories from Data science blogger and writers in Education and other communities.
5 Ways AI and Machine Learning Are Transforming Fintech
AI and machine learning. The financial services sector's landscape is altering due to AI and ML. Numerous advantages exist for customers and FinTech companies, such as improved financial analysis, client involvement, and customer service.
By Data science blogger2 years ago in Education
What is happening inside your brain when you die
What is the actual experience of death? How does it feel when it occurs? What are the final sensations that we physically encounter as we approach our inevitable dying moments? It is not uncommon to hear stories of individuals who have had near-death experiences and have encountered a range of vivid sensations and experiences when they believed their lives were about to end. Survivors often describe hallucinatory states where they see loved ones, recall specific memories, or feel as if they are floating outside their bodies. While the validity of these claims may be questionable, firsthand accounts of near-death experiences provide some insight into what could happen subjectively in our final moments. This raises the question: what happens after death? How much sensation remains after we pass away? Does brain death signify the complete cessation of brain function? And what is the significance of the bright light at the end of the tunnel? Before addressing these questions, we must first understand what death truly is. Death, as a concept, may appear simple to define, but it represents a complex intersection of biology, medicine, philosophy, and religion. In the past, a patient's time of death was recorded as the moment their heart stopped beating, as cells and organs cannot function without a blood supply. This is known as Clinical Death. However, advancements in resuscitation techniques, such as CPR and defibrillation, have enabled medical professionals to potentially revive patients by restarting their breathing or heartbeat after they have stopped. Furthermore, an individual lacking functioning lungs or a heart can be sustained with the help of life support equipment or could potentially undergo an organ transplant or receive a pacemaker. This is why there are accounts of patients being revived from the brink of death. These sensational stories often refer to clinical death, not some mystical or gruesome act of necromancy. Given that a person can be revived from this definition of death, a more definitive explanation is required. Therefore, medical professionals and coroners have established another criterion commonly used to pinpoint the moment of death, known as brain death. Unlike the efforts to pinpoint the exact moment of death based on breathing or heartbeats, brain death, also known as biological death, is the stage at which a deceased individual's brain ceases to exhibit any signs of electrical activity. This is significant because the human brain sends electrical signals to different parts of the body through the nervous system, including organs responsible for internal functions and muscles necessary for movement. However, defining death as brain death implies that the absence of electrical activity in the brain indicates the absence of consciousness in the individual. In other words, Elvis has truly left the building. Nevertheless, advocates of brain death as the most logical way to differentiate between life and death face some challenges. Just like the debate over defining death as the absence of a heartbeat or respiration, there are lingering electrical signals in the brain after biological death. In certain instances, individuals declared brain dead may exhibit signs of ongoing biological processes, such as functioning circulatory and respiratory systems, active immune responses, and normal temperature regulation post-brain death. The widespread acceptance of brain death as the primary definition of death stems from the brain's crucial role in shaping our identity as unique individuals. Assuming brain death signifies the complete, irreversible cessation of all cognitive functions, the aftermath may involve limited or no bodily functions. The possibility of recovering a person's thoughts or personality diminishes significantly, given the current limitations of medical technology. This raises a crucial question: what is the subjective experience of a person undergoing brain death? If the brain, responsible for our thoughts, bodily functions, and perception of the world, ceases to function, what sensations or perceptions might accompany death? The concise response is that we have very limited knowledge about what dying truly entails, as no one can provide a firsthand account of the experience. Our only references are near-death survivors. When it comes to the complete and irreversible process of transitioning from life to death, it is impossible for anyone to return and describe the subjective sensations of death. However, delving into a more detailed explanation, although understanding death from the perspective of the brain may seem unattainable, there are certain avenues we can explore that may offer intriguing insights into the nature of death. By examining these sources, we may gain a better understanding of what occurs in our brains during the process of dying. One individual who could potentially shed light on this matter is an 87-year-old man who developed epilepsy due to a head injury sustained from a fall. Unfortunately, this led to a series of epileptic seizures, during which doctors administered continuous electroencephalography (EEG) to monitor his brain activity. Tragically, the man experienced a heart attack during this procedure and passed away. However, this unforeseen event provided doctors with a unique opportunity to record the electrical activity of a human brain as it ceased functioning. During the 15-minute period of brain activity that was recorded at the time of the man's death, doctors specifically focused on the 30 seconds before his heartbeat stopped and the 30 seconds that followed. What they discovered was that there were changes in different bands of neural oscillations, namely gamma, delta, theta, alpha, and beta, just before and after the man's heart stopped. Now, if all of this sounds like technical jargon you would hear in a poorly written episode of a science fiction show like Doctor Who, then don't worry. Allow me to explain. Neural oscillations, which are commonly referred to as brain waves, are the scientific term for the rhythmic patterns of activity present in a normally functioning brain. Gamma oscillations, in particular, are involved in higher cognitive functions such as dreaming, memory retrieval, information processing, concentration, and conscious perception. Interestingly, these gamma oscillations were present both before and immediately after the man's death. So, what does this mean for what the brain experiences as we die? Well, based on the fact that this man's brain was generating oscillations associated with memory retrieval, similar to what a storyteller might call flashbacks, it led to speculation that in its final moments, the brain may recall and replay significant moments from a person's life. You've probably heard the cliché of someone's life "flashing before their eyes" before they pass away, and you may have even been encouraged to ensure that your own life is exciting and worth watching when that time comes. It seems that, if we're being optimistic, there may be some truth to that notion. The primary discovery of this specific study was that the brain appears to coordinate a biological reaction to the process of death. This phenomenon has also been observed in rats; under controlled conditions, they exhibit similar changes in their gamma brain waves just before and after death. This research was conducted by scientists who euthanized a large number of rats. As predicted, this topic is quite grim. Additionally, these findings appear to align with the firsthand reports of many near-death survivors, as a significant number of them describe very similar instances of recollecting important memories. If we are to believe that our brains replay some of our happiest memories, it does provide a sense of optimism and comfort when faced with the finality and ominous nature of death. However, it must be noted that there is no definitive evidence to support the idea that this is precisely what occurs in our brains at the moment of death. While it may be comforting to envision death as a compilation of our fondest moments, the brain wave data supporting this theory is derived from a single case. It is important to remember that the individual in question was eighty-seven years old and had also suffered a severe head injury, resulting in seizures and brain swelling, all of which could have impacted his neural activity and complicated the interpretation of his brain wave recordings. Furthermore, the practical and ethical challenges associated with conducting similar experiments on other terminally ill patients make it difficult to ascertain with certainty what transpires in our brains at the time of death. That said, there have been similar experiments conducted, although not extensively enough to provide a conclusive answer. Nevertheless, when analyzing the brain activity of four patients who passed away while under EEG monitoring, doctors discovered comparable results. Each patient exhibited electrical activity in the TPJ region of their brains at the moment of death. The TPJ is located at the junction of the temporal, parietal, and occipital lobes at the posterior of the brain. This particular area has been associated with dreams, hallucinations, and other altered states of consciousness. While it is impossible to determine what these patients experienced during their final surges of neural activity, the fact that it occurred in the brain region linked to dreaming and hallucinating is intriguing. In fact, this could potentially provide an alternative explanation for the processes that occur in our brains during death. Although the question of whether our brains recall memories when we die remains debatable, it is entirely possible that experiences described by some near-death survivors, such as the sensation of floating outside their own bodies, seeing or hearing loved ones, or vivid visions, may be hallucinations created by the brain as it gradually slows down, potentially due to reduced oxygen from the cessation of blood flow when the heart stops beating. This contributes significantly to the explanation of the phenomenon known as the 'light at the end of the tunnel'. Individuals who have survived near-death experiences often report seeing a heavenly light, which could potentially be attributed to hallucinations influenced by their religious beliefs. This could be the reason why such imagery has been prevalent throughout history. It is crucial to acknowledge that the experiences our brains undergo during death may not be the same for everyone. The speed and cause of death vary among individuals, with sudden cardiac arrest resulting in rapid death, while chronic illnesses or natural causes lead to a slower decline. These differences in bodily functions can impact the brain's experience during the dying process. For instance, treatable conditions like heart disease or cancer can prolong the dying process, potentially causing feelings of depression and detachment in individuals aware of their impending death. As bodily functions deteriorate, sensory perceptions may change, making once familiar stimuli appear strange and unsettling. This alteration in perception could be attributed to chemical changes in the brain as death approaches. Ultimately, the dying process itself is a unique event for each individual. Depending on the cause, the process of dying can be a distressing experience for the individual undergoing it. However, this is not always the case. Pain arises from the nerves triggering electrical signals in the brain. Therefore, if a person's death is a result of a sudden and painful injury or medical condition, it is likely that their conscious brain would have experienced that painful sensation as one of its final perceptions. Nevertheless, once the brain ceases to function, the transmission of these electrical impulses from the nervous system to the brain ceases as well. As for what occurs in our brains after death, it remains uncertain. Fortunately, the decomposition of human bodies after death prevents us from experiencing the pain of our bodies disintegrating at a cellular level. The existence of a 'soul' is a topic for another discussion, often influenced by one's philosophical or religious beliefs. The exploration of what we may or may not experience in our final moments is an ongoing area of research for scientists. There have been instances of brief electrical activity in the brain even after death, which could be attributed to the reliving of past memories, hallucinations as a coping mechanism, or simply a rare natural phenomenon. Regardless, the truth will be revealed to all of us in due time.
By Lillian Formelováabout 24 hours ago in Education
Tea set by a suffragette
Pankhurst is a name well known to the history of women’s suffrage. Who hasn't heard the name Emmaline Pankhurst, founder of the Women's Social and Political Union (WSPU), an all-women organisation campaigning for the right to vote? The group that helped to achieve the right to vote for women in Great Britain and Ireland in 1918. Some know of her daughter Christabel, both being honoured by the Pankhurst memorial in Victoria Palace Gardens, London, right next to the UK Parliament buildings. Sylvia Pankhurst is notably not included in the monument. Why? Because she split with the WSPU to campaign against Britain's entry into First World War.
By Raymond G. Taylor3 days ago in Art
Comments
There are no comments for this story
Be the first to respond and start the conversation.