Critique
Comments[wikitext]
The application of RL techniques in the cache management mechanism is very interesting. From reading the page, I could generally understand how UCB was applied to the problem. However, some of the text need paraphrasing as they did not flow smoothly and some sentences needed multiple reads to grasp the idea (understandable though, as this is a rough draft). In the discussion of the results, it would be better to display the results as a table or a graph, since the terminal stdout is harder to parse. Other than that, I think the content is focused and the idea is intriguing; the page will be much better with a cleaner write-up.
Scheme[wikitext]
- 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. 4
- The abstract is a concise and clear summary. 4
- 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). 3
- 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. -
- The references and links to external pages are well chosen. 3
- 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. 3
- If I was grading it out of 20, I would give it: 16
KumseokJung (talk)