Critique

Good structure and initial part. Good conclusion section. I like the examples of applications in the end. I find the explanation with the table helpful to get the background, although it can be not clear to a non-expert reader since it talks about topics that are given for granted. The part from “Formal Definition” to “Belief MDP” could benefit from some rewriting to make the English more easy to follow. I would make the notation in the section “Belief MDP” more clear, as there are overlappings with the notation in the previous section. In particular, “b” is used in both section, but I think it refers to different things; I think it would be more clear if “b” was openly defined in the second section. There is a typo “oroginal POMDP”.

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: 3 • 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: 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: 4 • 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: 17.5