Course talk:CPSC522/Topology and Embedding Multi-relational Data

Well presented and interesting topic. Would perhaps be nice to see a motivating example..? I get the idea of embedding data and considering the effects of different metrics, but then I don't have a clear idea of what exactly was accomplished in the paper. What was the hypothesis and what was the conclusion? Some minor grammatical errors, a final read-through should catch those.

The topic is relevant for the course. 4 The writing is clear and the English is good. 4 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. 5 There were appropriate (original) examples that helped make the topic clear. 3 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. 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. 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. 3 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

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. 1
• 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. 4
• The references and links to external pages are well chosen. 4
• 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

• A very well-organized page.
• Are there any evaluation results or code?
• Noted that figures and algorithm are to be added.