Revision as of 06:17, 15 February 2012 by Mboutin (Talk | contribs)

(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

Instruction for Peer Review of HW1, ECE662, Spring 2012


If you go to your own dropbox and click on "my assignments", you should find an anonymous homework waiting to be reviewed. There should be a comment box below the homework, as well as a pdf upload button.

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!)

You can write your comments directly in the comment box, or upload a pdf.

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 concerned with a relevant aspect of "classification assuming normally distributed features"? 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.

Take off 15 points if only the "Naive Bayes" approach was tested (i.e. if the features were assumed to be independent).

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


Questions/comments

Feel free to write your questions and comments below.

  • Write a question here.
    • Answer here.

Back to HW1

Back to ECE662 Spring 2012

Alumni Liaison

Ph.D. on Applied Mathematics in Aug 2007. Involved on applications of image super-resolution to electron microscopy

Francisco Blanco-Silva