Course talk:CPSC522/Experiments with Reinforcement Learning

The page looks good! It has a good coverage and the explanations are thorough. I didn't actually find anything to critique except the fact that the page is incomplete and you can talk more about the results of the things you tried. Maybe talking a little more about frameworks/implementation details or challenges would be useful.

---

Marking scheme:

* The topic is relevant for the course. 5
* The writing is clear and the English is good. 5
* The page is written at an appropriate level for CPSC 522 students (where the students have diverse backgrounds). 5
* The formalism (definitions, mathematics) was well chosen to make the page easier to understand. 4
* The abstract is a concise and clear summary. 4
* There were appropriate (original) examples that helped make the topic clear. 4
* There was appropriate use of (pseudo-) code. N/A
* It had a good coverage of representations, semantics, inference and learning (as appropriate for the topic). 3
* It is correct. 5 
* It was neither too short nor too long for the topic. 5
* It was an appropriate unit for a page (it shouldn't be split into different topics or merged with another page). 5
* It links to appropriate other pages in the wiki. 2
* The references and links to external pages are well chosen. N/A
* I would recommend this page to someone who wanted to find out about the topic. 4
* This page should be highlighted as an exemplary page for others to emulate. 4
If I was grading it out of 20, I would give it: 18

• The page seems to be a little short
• It could use some reference links (at least to the title topic, RL!)
• An explicit hypothesis, or what you were hoping to learn from the experiment (since it's not surprising that RL works for something quite similar to arcade games) would be nice
• Maybe include pseudocode

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. 5
• The writing is clear and the English is good. 5
• The page is written at an appropriate level for CPSC 522 students (where the students have diverse backgrounds). 5
• The formalism (definitions, mathematics) was well chosen to make the page easier to understand. 5
• The abstract is a concise and clear summary. 4
• There were appropriate (original) examples that helped make the topic clear. 3
• There was appropriate use of (pseudo-) code. 0
• It had a good coverage of representations, semantics, inference and learning (as appropriate for the topic). 5
• It is correct. 5
• It was neither too short nor too long for the topic. 3
• It was an appropriate unit for a page (it shouldn't be split into different topics or merged with another page). 5
• It links to appropriate other pages in the wiki. 0
• The references and links to external pages are well chosen. 0
• I would recommend this page to someone who wanted to find out about the topic. 4
• This page should be highlighted as an exemplary page for others to emulate. 4

If I was grading it out of 20, I would give it: 17

• A good page with good graphics and explanations.
• Note: This page seems incomplete.
• Will you have a hypothesis? I believe it's part of the criteria.
• Perhaps you can include a description of your results and images.
• References?