| (One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
=Instruction for Peer Review of Mini Project 1, [[ECE662]], Spring 2016= | =Instruction for Peer Review of Mini Project 1, [[ECE662]], Spring 2016= | ||
Hard copy of review due in class Friday February 26, 2016. Earlier submissions are welcome! | Hard copy of review due in class Friday February 26, 2016. Earlier submissions are welcome! | ||
| + | *Print two copies of your review: one with your name on, and one without. | ||
| + | *Staple both copies (anonymous one below) on top of the hard copy of the mini-project. Hand the whole thing back. | ||
| + | |||
Late submissions will be accepted until 5pm Friday February 26 in MSEE330. This is a hard deadline, no exception. If you can't make it to campus that day, hand in early. | Late submissions will be accepted until 5pm Friday February 26 in MSEE330. This is a hard deadline, no exception. If you can't make it to campus that day, hand in early. | ||
| Line 9: | Line 12: | ||
*Comment on the "good" things in the report | *Comment on the "good" things in the report | ||
*Comment on what could be improved, and how to improve it. (Phrase things nicely. Be diplomatic!) | *Comment on what could be improved, and how to improve it. (Phrase things nicely. Be diplomatic!) | ||
| − | + | Remember, the point of the project was to investigate when the method (i.e., Bayes Decision Rule for normally distributed features) works and when it does not work. | |
| − | + | ||
=Part 2= | =Part 2= | ||
| Line 17: | Line 19: | ||
35 Points: '''Problem definition and statement''' | 35 Points: '''Problem definition and statement''' | ||
| − | Is the problem/question investigated | + | Is the problem/question investigated relevant to the project statement? Is the problem/question addressed clearly stated? Is the problem/question investigated interesting and extensive enough. (If the writing is so poor that you have no idea what was done, feel free to take off a large number of points, or even all 35 points. |
35 Points: '''Experiments''' | 35 Points: '''Experiments''' | ||
Latest revision as of 13:53, 19 February 2016
Contents
Instruction for Peer Review of Mini Project 1, ECE662, Spring 2016
Hard copy of review due in class Friday February 26, 2016. Earlier submissions are welcome!
- Print two copies of your review: one with your name on, and one without.
- Staple both copies (anonymous one below) on top of the hard copy of the mini-project. Hand the whole thing back.
Late submissions will be accepted until 5pm Friday February 26 in MSEE330. This is a hard deadline, no exception. If you can't make it to campus that day, hand in early.
Part 1
Provide detailed comments on the problem addressed, experiments, conclusions, and report.
- Summarize what was done and how it was done.
- Comment on the "good" things in the report
- Comment on what could be improved, and how to improve it. (Phrase things nicely. Be diplomatic!)
Remember, the point of the project was to investigate when the method (i.e., Bayes Decision Rule for normally distributed features) works and when it does not work.
Part 2
Assign a grade out of 100 points and write this grade on the top line of the comment box. Your points should be divided as follows.
35 Points: Problem definition and statement
Is the problem/question investigated relevant to the project statement? Is the problem/question addressed clearly stated? Is the problem/question investigated interesting and extensive enough. (If the writing is so poor that you have no idea what was done, feel free to take off a large number of points, or even all 35 points.
35 Points: Experiments
Are the experiments relevant to the problem investigated? Are there enough experiments (to investigate the problem and be able to conclude)? Are the axes of all graphs and plots clearly labeled? Do all graphs and plots have a title? (If the writing is so poor that you have no idea what was done, feel free to take off a large number of points, or even all 35 points.)
20 Points: Conclusions
Are the conclusions clearly stated? Are the conclusions supported by the experiments? Are the conclusions interesting? Note that a negative conclusion, such as "this does not work", can still be interesting. (If the writing is so poor that you have no idea what was done, feel free to take off a large number of points, or even all 20 points.)
10 points: Presentation
PLEASE CHECK FOR PLAGIARISM (e.g., figures copied from a website, cut and paste text, etc.) IF YOU NOTICE ANY PLAGIARISM IN THE REPORT, ASSIGN A GRADE OF ZERO FOR THE ENTIRE REPORT AND NOTIFY THE INSTRUCTOR AS SOON AS POSSIBLE.
Questions/comments
Feel free to write your questions and comments below.
- Write a question here.
- Answer here
