critique

Hi Jordan,

Thanks for your feedback. I learned so many things from you.

I will consider them in finalizing my page.

Hi Jordan,

Again thanks for your helpful critique.

General

A quick proofread would be good, but the overall readability is fine.

I proofread the page. I hope that helps.

Abstract

> "solves" is a strong term. Does your work actually solve the problem, or does it perform better than some baseline?

I did not know this fact the “solve” is a “strong term”. I changed it to “helps to solve”. I don’t know if it is enough or not.

Hypothesis

The hypothesis, as stated, seems a bit general to me. Are you testing whether considering the dependencies helps in EVERY situation? I changed this part too “helps to solve in a restaurant data-set”

Modeling the problem

You state that the prior ratio is given; what would be the source? I add a part to state that it is calculated by the train-set or using prior knowledge.

Structure learning for X=Y

Could you elaborate on how we can infer P(descX and descY|X=Y) using that network? For example, is nameX multinomial with the correct spelling as well as every possible misspelling? And if so, is there a conditional probability table with entries for every possible spelling given there being an error or not? I tried to add this part. I thought that causes more confusing. So let’s think of that as a black box.

Discussion

I don't believe cross-validation requires learning parameters by hand; did I misunderstand your statement?

I changed this part. In this case, I’m calculating parameters by hand. That’s why I was not able to do that multiple times.