Difference between revisions of "Course:CPSC522/January2018"

From UBC Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search
(Key Dates)
Line 6: Line 6:
 
* February 3 - First Draft ready for critiquing. Each page has a number Jn on the home page. If you authored Jn, you will critique pages J(n-1), J(n+1) and J(n+6) where each addition is mod 18 (as there are 18 pages numbered J0 to J17). Please answer the questions on the evaluation page. Write your comments in the discussion tab of the page.  Please feel free to respond to them there too, and actually have a discussion. The critiques are not meant to be anonymous; you are meant to be helping each other.  If there are multiple authors for multiple pages, you should decide among you who gets what number (it doesn't really affect anyone else).
 
* February 3 - First Draft ready for critiquing. Each page has a number Jn on the home page. If you authored Jn, you will critique pages J(n-1), J(n+1) and J(n+6) where each addition is mod 18 (as there are 18 pages numbered J0 to J17). Please answer the questions on the evaluation page. Write your comments in the discussion tab of the page.  Please feel free to respond to them there too, and actually have a discussion. The critiques are not meant to be anonymous; you are meant to be helping each other.  If there are multiple authors for multiple pages, you should decide among you who gets what number (it doesn't really affect anyone else).
 
* February 6 - Critiques done
 
* February 6 - Critiques done
* February 12 - Final Draft ready for marking
+
* February 12 - Final Draft ready for marking. Use the template at http://cs.ubc.ca/~poole/cs522/2018/project_eval.py and email poole@cs.ubc.ca with a file that is legal Python.
* February 15 (2:00pm) - Marking Completed
+
* February 16 - Marking Completed
 
* February 13 - in-class debriefing and planning for February
 
* February 13 - in-class debriefing and planning for February
  

Revision as of 13:51, 13 February 2018

January Assignment

Your January assignment is to create a foundational page. It should define everything it requires. Please try to make your page consistent with related pages.

Key Dates

  • January 18 - choose pages
  • February 3 - First Draft ready for critiquing. Each page has a number Jn on the home page. If you authored Jn, you will critique pages J(n-1), J(n+1) and J(n+6) where each addition is mod 18 (as there are 18 pages numbered J0 to J17). Please answer the questions on the evaluation page. Write your comments in the discussion tab of the page. Please feel free to respond to them there too, and actually have a discussion. The critiques are not meant to be anonymous; you are meant to be helping each other. If there are multiple authors for multiple pages, you should decide among you who gets what number (it doesn't really affect anyone else).
  • February 6 - Critiques done
  • February 12 - Final Draft ready for marking. Use the template at http://cs.ubc.ca/~poole/cs522/2018/project_eval.py and email poole@cs.ubc.ca with a file that is legal Python.
  • February 16 - Marking Completed
  • February 13 - in-class debriefing and planning for February

Marking Scheme

Here is a tentative marking scheme. This is subject to change. Feel free to add questions, and edit the questions if they do not make sense.

On a scale of 1 to 5, where 1 means "strongly disagree" and 5 means "strongly agree" please rate and comment on the following:

  • The topic is relevant for the course.
  • The writing is clear and the English is good.
  • The page is written at an appropriate level for CPSC 522 students (where the students have diverse backgrounds).
  • The formalism (definitions, mathematics) was well chosen to make the page easier to understand.
  • The abstract is a concise and clear summary.
  • There were appropriate (original) examples that helped make the topic clear.
  • There was appropriate use of (pseudo-) code.
  • It had a good coverage of representations, semantics, inference and learning (as appropriate for the topic).
  • It is correct.
  • It was neither too short nor too long for the topic.
  • It was an appropriate unit for a page (it shouldn't be split into different topics or merged with another page).
  • It links to appropriate other pages in the wiki.
  • The references and links to external pages are well chosen.
  • I would recommend this page to someone who wanted to find out about the topic.
  • This page should be highlighted as an exemplary page for others to emulate.

If I was grading it out of 20, I would give it: