Course:CPSC522/MarchApril2018

From UBC Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

March/April Assignment

Your third and final assignment is to create a hypothesis related to the course and test it. Your result should describe the hypothesis and whether it works. The reader should be able to understand the background, what the the hypothesis is, whether the hypothesis is true, and the evidence you used to come to this conclusion. Your hypothesis can be theoretical or practical.

Extra Rules

  • You need to follow the rules on the main page and you should follow the guidelines there.
  • Each page can have multiple authors (so it can be a group project).
  • You need to add your page to the table of contents in a position that makes sense. Fell free to edit and change the structure of the table of content to give it a coherent structure.
  • You will need to give a presentation of at most 4 minutes + 2 minutes for questions for each person (so if you have a group of 3, for example, you need a coherent presentation of 12 minutes where everyone participates); do not go over! If you would like to give a presentation during term time please contact David. For those who do not want to present during class time, we will have a presentation session during exam time.
  • Please choose a topic that is different from other courses that you have done (or else you need to negotiate with the instructors to make sure you are not counting the same work multiple times).
  • You should refer to wiki pages and to other research papers as appropriate.

Key Dates

  • April 3 - last day to choose pages
  • April 16 - First Draft ready for critiquing. Each page has a number Mn on the home page.

- If a page M(n) has a single author, you will critique pages M(n-1), M(n+1) and M(n+6) where each addition is mod 15 (as there are 15 pages numbered M0 to M14).

- If a page M(n) has multiple authors, you will between you critique pages M(n-1), M(n+1), M(n+6), M(n+8), M(n+10), M(n+13) all mod 15. You decide between you who does which pages.

Write your comments in the discussion tab of the page. Please give constructive feedback --- give the sort of feedback you would like to receive --- and answer the questions on the evaluation 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.

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: