Course talk:CPSC522/PCFG

Comments

I was pleased with this page and felt I learned something new from it. A few points:

• "builds on" refers to this page as "PCG" not "PCFG"
• I may have missed this, but what does the "probability of a sentence" mean? It is explained how we find this probability, but I'm not clear on what this probability represents? probability of correct grammar, correct parsed meaning, or something else?
• The parse trees and grammar rules use a lot of abbreviations. I don't think you need to explain them, but it would be helpful to link to a page that explains them.
• I find the algorithm in figure 5 hard to understand, some deeper explanation on the purpose of each step in the algorithm would help.

Schema

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). 4 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. 5 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. 5

I would give it a 19/20

• 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: 3
  * There were appropriate (original) examples that helped make the topic clear: 5
  * There was appropriate use of (pseudo-) code:  3 (Although there wasn't pseudocode, given what you covered it wasn't really needed. Could be helpful if the page is expanded though.)
  * 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: 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 it: 19

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. 5
• There were appropriate (original) examples that helped make the topic clear. 5
• There was appropriate use of (pseudo-) code. 5
• 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. 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. 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. 5

If I was grading it out of 20, I would give it: 19

The page is full of detail and definitions. It does a good job of explaining PCFGs and the examples are useful. I have only minor edits to suggest.

• The sentence “This article discusses Probabilistic Context Free Grammars (PCFGs)” in the introduction is the same sentence as in the abstract. I don’t think it’s necessary as the first sentence in the introduction.
• “Title” should probably be changed to be "Probabilistic Context Free Grammars".