Course talk:CPSC522/Financial Forecasting using LSTM Networks

From UBC Wiki

Contents

Thread titleRepliesLast modified
Critique002:18, 14 March 2018
Critique 2017:20, 12 March 2018
Critique 1010:22, 10 March 2018
  • 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. 5
  • There were appropriate (original) examples that helped make the topic clear. 4
  • There was appropriate use of (pseudo-) code. 4
  • 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. 4
  • 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. 5
  • The references and links to external pages are well chosen. 5
  • I would recommend this page to someone who wanted to find out about the topic. 5
  • 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 a 19

Very well written page, the background provides an excellent history on the topic and the sections cover the papers well. A couple of small things, it would be good to include references to the two papers discussed in the references section, the links to recurrent neural networks in the LSTMs section are broken, and it might be good to condense the page a little bit.

BronsonBouchard (talk)02:08, 14 March 2018

Critique 2

A very interesting and well-articulated topic. The introduction and the conclusion are spot on and give enough background to the reader. Here are some of my suggestions to improve the page:

  1. Increase the size of the images so that they are readable
  2. It would be nice to see some of the explanation replaced by mathematical formulations so that it's easier to follow
  3. An explanation of the figures with reference may be required
  • 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. 3
  • The abstract is a concise and clear summary. 5
  • There were appropriate (original) examples that helped make the topic clear. 4
  • There was appropriate use of (pseudo-) code. 4
  • 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. 4
  • 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. 4
  • The references and links to external pages are well chosen. 5
  • I would recommend this page to someone who wanted to find out about the topic. 5
  • 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

KevinDsouza (talk)16:31, 12 March 2018

Critique 1

This is a very cool topic and an excellently written article on it. The introduction was especially interesting and provides enough background without being overbearing.

However, I do find the lack of mathematical formalism to occasionally obfuscate the descriptions of the methodologies in the papers. For example, a simple definition of the wavelet transform would be sufficient.

It might also be a good idea to split up the description of the methodologies into several paragraphs or even into a tasteful application of point form.

The first image may need citations.

Some small grammatical errors:

"A common approach to to..." in the second paragraph of "Financial Forecasting"

Random square bracket just before "time-series analysis" in the third paragraph of "Financial Forecasting"

I 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. 2
  • The abstract is a concise and clear summary. 5
  • There were appropriate (original) examples that helped make the topic clear. 4
  • There was appropriate use of (pseudo-) code. 4
  • 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. 4
  • 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. 3
  • The references and links to external pages are well chosen. 5
  • I would recommend this page to someone who wanted to find out about the topic. 5
  • 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

CarlKwan (talk)10:22, 10 March 2018