Critique

The page is very well written and concise enough to give all the information without being too long. It is motivated very well and I found it very useful to read examples throughout the page: good job! I would add a little explanation on TD error since I think not all the readers have enough background to know what it is. I also think the page is missing the motivation for adopting that particular reward values: why do movement and wrong dropoff/pickup have the same score, and successful dropoff have such a big score compared to the other ones? Also I think the page would benefit from a bit more explanation on the pseudocode. For instance, it seems to have an infinite loop for the loop from line 2 to 4; some explanation could help clarify the code.

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. 5 There were appropriate (original) examples that helped make the topic clear. 5 There was appropriate use of (pseudo-) code. 3 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. 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: 18.5