Course:CPSC522/October2023

October Assignment

Describe some research that has been published. You should choose two papers, by different authors (no authors in common) where one builds on the other. The paper must be relevant to the course; ask David if in doubt. You should describe the background, and then describe the incremental contribution of one paper over the other. What was the actual contribution of the latter paper? The reader should be able to understand the problem, where it fits into the big picture, the solution proposed and how that solution was evaluated. Add your own thoughts on how successful it was and how it can be improved. See http://www.cs.ubc.ca/~poole/cs522/2023W1/readings.html for some possible topics.

Extra Rules

You need to follow the rules on the main page and you should follow the guidelines there.
Each page should have a principle author. You do not need co-authors but can have co-authors; co-authorship is encouraged. If others help you with your page, you should help them too.
You need to add your page to the table of contents in a position that makes sense. Feel free to edit and change the structure of the table of content to give it a coherent structure.
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 reference (link) to wiki pages and to other research papers as appropriate. It should be clear what the two papers you are describing have in common, but you should also refer to other papers.
The rules are editable and can be changed.

Key Dates (January/February Assignment)

September 21 (or before!) - choose page and start writing
October 10 - First draft of page ready for critiquing.
October 13 - Critiques due
October 17 - Final pages ready for marking
October 21. Marking Completed. You need to mark every page (including your own). Use the template at http://cs.ubc.ca/~poole/cs522/2023W1/project_eval.py

Marking Scheme

Here are some things to think about when grading. Feel free to add questions, and edit the questions if they do not make sense.

Comment on any of 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 too short 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: